|)l|>M1lll!tl!ltlliHHHMin|l>>|!itl(IMIin|)|!M>Hi 


llMMItmiHilMil'Ill'"' 


ill   11  ij!f  111!  illlH 

MJ!  mnm 


I  li  iliiill 


i 


iiiiii!;ii!iii!iiii;i;iiii!iiiitiiiiiiiiitiiii!i)ii 


I    !      !   I! 


I 


li!;'"iii:!""- 


O  PRINCETOlSr,  N.  J.  -^J* 


Presented  by  Mr.  Samuel  Agnew  of  Philadelphia,  Pa. 


BX  7111  .C9  1856 
Cummings,  Preston,  1800- 

1875. 
A  dictionary  of 

nnnarficrat "innal   nsaafts    and 


DICTIONAEY 


OP 


CONGREGATIONAL  USAGES  AND  PRINCIPLES 


ACCORDING  TO   ANCIENT  AND  MODERN  AUTHORS: 


TO  WHICH  ABE  ADDED 

BRIKP  NOTICES   OF  SOME  OP  THE  PRINCIPAL  WRITERS,  ASSEMBLIES,  AND 
TREATISES  REFERRED   TO   IN   THE  COMPILATION. 

BY 

,/ 
PRESTON   CUMMINGS, 

OF  LEICESTER,  MASS.,  LATE  PASTOR  OF  THE  CONGBEQATIONAL  CHUBOB, 
BCCELAND,  MASS. 


EIGHTH      EDITION. 


BOSTON: 

S.    K.    WHIPPLE    AND     CO. 

161,  Washington  Street. 

1856. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congi-ess,  in  the  year  1852,  by 

PRESTON  CUMMINGS, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  Distncc  Court  of  the  District  of  Massachusetts. 


BOSTON: 

PRINTED  BY  JOHN   WILSON  AND   SON, 
No.  2z  School  Street. 


PREFACE, 


t 


It  has  been  said  that  a  good  book  needs  no  Preface. 
Had  this  fewer  defects,  it  would  require  less  apology. 
The  origin  of  this  work  was  a  supposed  want  of  copious 
references  to  many  points  of  frequent  practical  use  in 
councils,  church-meetings,  and  private  duties.  It  was 
undertaken  at  the  request  of  the  Franklin  Association, 
but  without  a  due  counting  of  the  cost  by  the'  compiler. 

Three  full  years  of  close  daily  application  has  sufficed 
only  to  discover  the  magnitude  of  that  subject,  which 
lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  whole  fabric  of  our  civil  as 
well  as  religious  liberties.  Even  Hume,  with  all  his 
scorn,  admits  that  to  the  principles  and  efforts  of  the 
Puritans  the  English  owe  the  whole  freedom  of  their 
Constitution. 

The  reader  will  make  no  new  discovery  when  he  finds 
that  there  are  many  and  great  defects  in  this  work.  The 
necessary  hurry  of  consulting  so  many  treatises;  creates 
a  constant  liability  of  giving  a  wrong  shade  to  the  views 


iv  PREFACE. 

of  their  authors.  To  express  those  views  in  full  is  im- 
practicable ;  and  brevity  or  irrelevancy  very  often  forbids 
introducing  both  sides  of  the  argument.  All  that  cau 
reasonably  be  expected,  in  such  a  case,  is  a  striking  or 
elucidating  extract  or  epitome ;  while  the  copious  refer- 
ences direct  to  chapter  and  page,  where  the  author  cited 
has  treated  the  subject  at  length. 

The  reader  should  never  judge  of  the  general  character 
of  a  book  by  a  mere  reference  to  it  in  this  compilation. 
The  work  may  be  valuable,  notwithstanding  one  supposed 
or  real  inconsistency ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  of  compa- 
ratively little  worth,  though  it  contains  some  important 
admissions  or  illustrations. 

With  sincere  aim  to  be  a  faithful  lexicographer,  this 
book  must  still  have  very  much  the  shade  of  the  com- 
piler's sentiments.  Selecting  those  points  which  to  him 
seem  most  important,  those  which  seem  paramount  to 
people  of  different  views  are  sometimes  necessarily  ex- 
cluded. Still,  through  an  endeavor  to  avoid  this  evil, 
our  differences  may  sometimes  appear  greater  than  they 
are ;  because  the  views  of  the  few  who  may  be  but  semi- 
Congregationalists  thus  get  a  prominence  disproportioned 
to  those  of  the  multitudes  who  are  agreed.  The  aim  has 
been  to  state  facts  as  they  are,  and  let  the  consequences 
care  for  themselves.  This  has  led  to  some  slight  change 
of  the  author's  views  on  u  few  points  of  order ;  but  he 
may  sustain  himself  from  any  probable  charge  of  fickle- 
ness, with  the  reply  of  an  old  convert  to  Nonconformity, 
"  He  that  can  long  and  closely  contemplate  a  subject 


PREFACE.  V 

with  no  modification  of  his  own  views  shall  not  have  me 
for  his  competitor." 

Some  clamor  for  a  work  of  undoubted  authority  in  our 
churches  We  have  one,  and  can  have  but  one,  such 
work,  viz.,  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Our  ecclesiastical 
government  is  a  pure  theocracy,  administered  by  the 
people,  who  can  remove  their  officers  whenever  they 
cease  to  rule  —  that  is,  to  moderate  —  according  to  the 
divine  constitution. 

The  churches  are  confederated  only  by  fraternal  ties, 
and  the  great, common  charter  of  their  existence.  Do 
any,  then,  inquire  of  what  use  is  it  to  consult  opinions 
and  precedents  ?  It  is  answered,  To  learn  truth,  not  to 
be  dictated  by  fallible  men.  He  who  relies  implicitly  on 
commentaries  is  a  mental  slave  :  he  who  discards  the 
use  of  them  is  an  ignorant  egotist.  It  is  with  every  un- 
inspired book  as  Richard  Mather  said  of  a  decree  of  a 
council :  "It  has  just  so  much  force  as  there  is  force  in 
the  reason  of  it." 

The  reader  should  be  apprised,  that  the  references  to 
books  in  the  several  libraries,  contained  in  the  Notices  at 
the  end  of  this  volume,  is  incomplete.  It  was  also  found 
impracticable  to  give  a  particular  notice  of  every  work 
and  author  referred  to  in  the  Dictionary. 

With  all  its  faults,  this  book  is  now  sent  into  the 
world.  If  men  will  be  excited  to  examine  the  originals, 
even  to  detect  its  errors,  one  great  end  of  its  publication 
will  be  gained.  These  originals  contain  vast  funds  of 
sound  learning,  by  men  who  knew  whereof  they  affirmed, 


a     ^i  ■  .t  P  R  E  F  A  C  E.       t 

4 

and<jvlio  many^o/ithem  suffered,  and  even  died,  for  the 
maintenance  of  those  blessed  truths  and  principles 
through  which  \Ve  now  enjoy  rest,  liberty,  and  pros- 
perity. May  this  work  be  instrumental  in  leading 
Christians  to  the  law  and  the  testimony  as  the  ground 
of  their  faith  and  practice,  and  contribute  its  mite  to- 
wards advancing  spiritual  to  the  overthrow  of  formal 
religion ;  and  the  praise  be  to  Almighty  God  for  ever ! 


The  first  edition  of  this  work,  published^last  April,  was 
exhausted  early  in  the  winter.  In  preparing  this  stereo- 
type edition,  nearly  all  the  passages  have  been  collated 
with  the  originals.  A  few  new  topics  and  many  new 
references  have  been  added ;  chapters  and  sections  have 
been  often  substituted  for  pages ;  and  the  references  to 
the  works  of  John  Robinson  conformed  to  the  recent 
American  edition. 

Grateful  acknowledgments  are  due  to  ministers,  who 
have  so  universally  aided  the  author,  both  by  friendly 
criticisms  and  recommendations  of  the  work  to  their 
people. 

Leicester,  April,  1853. 


CONTENTS. 


Page 

Accusation 13 

Accused 14 

Admonition 14 

Affinity 16 

Agreement 19 

Amusements 20 

Anointing 22 

Apostles,  not  Bishops    .     ,  23 

Bishops  succeed  not   .     .  23 

Appeals  from  Churches .     .  24 

How  far  allowed    ...  25 

Approbation  to  preach  .     .  26 

Associations 27 

Authority,  Human    ...  30 
Baptism,  Subjects  of      .     .  31 
Does  it  admit  to  Church- 
es?    35 

Does  it  admit  Infants  ?    .  36 
Is    it    Indispensable    to 

Communion:     ...  37 
May  it  be  administered 
■without  a  Chiirch  ?      .38 

Public 39 

AVTio  may  administer  ?    .  40 

Is  Popish,  valid?    ...  41 

Mode  of 41 

Benediction 42 

Bishops,  Presbyters  ...  42 

Diocesan,  not  jure  divino  43 
Diocesan,  not  Successors 

of  the  Apostles  ...  44 

Had  but  one  Church  .     .  44 

Chosen  by  the  People     .  45 

Brownists 45 


Plige 

Calling  of  IMinisters  ...  47 

Catholicism 47 

Censiures 48 

Ceremonies 49 

Chaplains 51 

Christians 51 

Christmas 51 

Chxirch,  what 52 

Of  what  constituted  ?      .  55 

Mode  of  constituting  .     .  5Q> 
Ministers   not    necessary 

to  constitute  .     .     .     .  58 
"What  number  may  con- 
stitute?        58 

May  one  have  Branches  ?  59 

Majority  constitute     .     .  60 

Officers  of 60 

In  what  sense  one      .     .  61 

Duty  to  join      ....  62 

Romish 62 

Meetings,  how  called  ?     .  63 

Churches,  Distinct  Bodies  .  63 

Instituted  Bodies  ...  67 

Primitive  Congregational  68 
Subject  to   no   External 

Jurisdiction  ....  70 
Discipline  each  other,  but 

not  jtu-idically   .     .     .  72 

Objects  of 75 

All  Christians  may  esta- 
blish    ......  75 

Seat  of  Power  ....  76 

Begun     and     continued 

^vithotit  Officers,  &c.  .  76 


Vlll 


CONTENTS. 


Page 
ChxiTches,  continued. 

Ceiisiu'cs  of 78 

^lerabers  of,  have  Equal 

liights 80 

Equal  aiid  ludependent .  80 
What  "we  may  not  join  .  81 
AVhat  Ave  should  separate 

from 82 

How  proceed  with  Disor- 
derly of  another  Church     82 
Proceedings  of,  when  Pas- 
tors offend      .     .     .     .     83' 
Assist  Feeble  Sisters  .     .83 
Early  Liberality  of  New 

Engiana 83 

Collections,  Weekly  ...     8-1 

Commentaries 84 

Committees,  Chiurch       .     .     84 

Communion,  Terms  of  .     .     85 

Occasional,  open    .     .     .86 

Inti'oduction  to      .     .     ,     87 

Proportioned  to  Purity   .     88 

Conference  Meetings      .     .     89 

Conferences  of  Churches     .     89 

Confessions  of  Faith       .     .     90 

Of  Secret  Sin    ....     91 

For  Sin 91 

Confused  Records      ...     91 
Congregational     Churches, 

Early  History  of  .  .  .  91 
Congregationalism,  what  .  94 
Epitome  of  Principles  of  95 
By  Divine  Right  .  .  .  97 
Adopted  by  impartial  .  98 
Power  of,  to  prevent  and 

redress  Error      .     .     .99 
Fitted  to  all  Cu'cumstan- 

ces 100 

Whence  its  Danger  .  .101 
Duty  to  abide  by  .  .  .102 
Its  Prospects  foreseen  .  102 
Its  Prospects  realized      .  103 

Conscience 103 

Consecrations 105 

Consociations,  Origin  of     .107 

Power  of 108 

Reasons  lu-ged  for  .  .  .110 
Objections  to     .     .     .     .111 

Contumacy 113 

Councils,  ilarly    .     .     .     .113 


Councils,  continued. 

Proper  Objects  of     .     . 

Have  they  Authority  to 
ordain  and  depose  r 

To  reverse  Decisions  ? 

Juridical  Power  ? 

Of  whom  composed . 

How  chosen    .     .     . 

How  convened     .     . 

Occasions  for  .     .     . 

Have    Pastors    a   Nega 
tive  Vote  in  ?    .     . 

Pastors  sit  in,  by  virtue 
of  their  Delegation 

Ex-parte    .... 

Are  they  beneficial  ? 

!May  not  enlbrce  Creeds 

When  they  expire    . 
Covenant  .     .     .     .     . 

Creeds  

Dancing 

D.D 


Deacons,  theii'  Office    . 

Theu'  Qualifications  and 
Induction    .     . 

Their  «'  Good  Degree ' 
Deacons'  Wives .     .     . 
Dedications    .... 

Delegates 

Delegation  of  Rights    . 

Chxu'ches  may  send,  &c 
Democracy  in  Churches 
Devotions,     Private,     in 

Meetings    .... 
Discipline,  for  what     . 

Proper,  a  Privilege  . 

Mode  of  Procedure  in 

All  members  boujid  to 

Council  in       ... 

Of  one  Church  by  an- 
other   

Congregational,  efficient 

Affected  by  Civil  Courts 

Dismission,    have     all     a 

Right  to,  who  ask  it  ? 

Denied  to  those  under 

discipline     .     .     .     . 

Docti'ines     of    CongTega- 

tionalism     .     .     .     . 

Ecclesiastical  Power    . 


Page 
114 

117 
118 
119 
122 
125 
125 
125 

126  • 

126 
127 
128 
128 
128 
128 
131 
140 
140 
141 

143 
143 
144 
144 
146 
146 
147 
147 

148 
148 
149 
150 
153 
153 

154 
154 
155 

155 

157 

157 
157 


CONTENTS. 


IZ 


Pago 

Elders,  ruling     ....  158 

Same  as  Bishops .     .     ,  159 

When  out  of  date     .     .  160 

Plurality  of     ....  161 

Their  Office    ....  161 

Rule  of 162 

Rule  as  Stewards  .  .  163 
Servants  of  the  Church  164 
Rule  as  Moderators  .  .  165 
How  invested  -vvith  rule  166 
Is  their  Office  perpe- 
tual?         166 

Chosen  by  the  People   .  166 

Power  of,  how  extensive  167 
Are   they   necessary  U  ■ 

Church  Acts  ?       .  167 
Have  they  exclusive  Go- 
vernment? .     .     .     .  168 
Election  gives  but  does  not 

transmit  Power    .     .     .  169 

Evangelists,  what    .     .     .  170 
Not  for    Conversion  of 

Infidels 170 

Excommunication,  what  .  171 

By  vote  of  Church   .     .  175 

Through  Officers      .     .  175 

Is  Improper,  valid  r  .     .  176 

Only  for  great  Siri5  .     .  176 

Council,  previoTis  to      .  177 

Made  public    .     .     .     .  177 

In  Absence  of  Offender  178 
One    Chiirch    has    not 

Power  of,  over  another  178 
Excommunicated,    how 

treated 178 

Sentence    of,    regarded 

till,  &c 181 

May  they  set  up  Church- 
es ?     181 

Faith,  particular      .     .     .  182 
Fellowship,  all  Christians 

have  right  to    .     .     .  182 

Of  various  Degrees  .     .  182 

Rules  of 182 

Flight  in  Persecution  .     .  183 

Forms,  needless  ....  183 

Fundamentals     .     .     .     .  183 

Funerals 185 

Gifts,  Weekly    ....  186 

Which  God  gave  to  Men  186 


Pag« 
Government,  Church,  in- 
stituted    186 

Not  lan-ful  to  alter   .     ,  187 
Not  varied  by  circum- 

tances           .          .     .  187 

In  the  People ....  188 

Is  it  mixed  ?    .     .     .     ,  L89 
Congregational,    how 

distinguished   .     .     ,  190 

Ci\il 190 

Graves,  their  Position       .  194 

Habits,  rejected  .     .     .     .  195 

Half-way  Covenant     .     .  197 

Heresy 200 

Holy  bays 200 

Idleness  disciplinable  .     .  201 

Idolatry 202 

Imposition  of  Hands  un- 
necessary    ....  202 

By  whom 204 

Impro\^dence      ....  205 

Independency,  what    .     .  205 

Of  Churches   ....  207 

Endangers  Monarchy    ,  208 

Indifferents 211 

Installation,  is  it  indispen- 
sable ?  .  .  .  ..^  .  211 
Mode  of  .  .  .  .*  .  211 
Institutions,  Gospel  ,  .  212 
Intermissions,  Sabbath  .  212 
Jesus     Christ,    the     only 

Lawgiver  to  his  Church  212 
Jurisdiction  in  the  People  213 
Keys,  Power  of .     .     .     .  213 
Granted  to  Chiurches    .  213 
For  Churches  with  El- 
ders      214 

Kingship,  Christ's  .     .     .  216 
Kneeling  at  Communion  .  216 
Laws,  New  England,  con- 
cerning Religion  .     .     .  217 
Legislation,  Church     .     .  118 
Letter  of  Dismission     .     .  220 
Liberty  of  Conscience       .  220 
License  to  Preach    .     .     .  220 
Limits  of  Churches       .     .  223 
Litvu-gy     ......  223 

Lord's  Prayer     ....  224 

Lord's  Supper,  a  Church 

Ordinance 224 


CONTENTS. 


Page 
Lord's  Supper,  cojitimied. 
For    any    but    Church 

Members  r  .  .  .  .  225 
Kot  for  known  Wicked  226 
Not  private  ....  227 
Who  may  administer  ?  .  227 
Is  Baptism  indispensa- 
ble to?    228 

Should    it    be     conse- 
crated?   .     .     ...     228 
How     often     adminis- 
tered?       229 

Not  neglected  for,  &c.  .     229 
Lot,  when  la^A-ful    ...     230 
Magistrates,      may      they 
make  Laws  establish-'' 
ing  Religion  ?   .     .     .     231 
Should  punish  Rioters  ,     232 
Should    they     have     a 
Voice  in  Chm-ches  ?  .     232 
Majorities  govern     .     .     .     233 
When  sho\ild  forbear    .     234 
Marriage,  not  Pastor's  Of- 
fice WorK    ....     234 
Solemnized    by   IMinis- 

ters 235 

On  tl^  Lord's  Day  .     .     236 
Meeting-house    ....     236 
Members,  Church,  experi- 
mental Clu-istians       .     236 
Satisfy  the  Church   .     .     238 
Exanuuation  of   .     .     .     240 
Mode  of  receiving     .     .     240 
Scandalous,  not  receiv- 
ed, &c 241 

Removing,  may  be  ex- 
amined   .          ...     242 
•  Remove  ^^'ith  consent    .     242 
Removed   mthout   dis- 
mission    243 

Pious,  of  Heretical  and 
Scandalous  Churches, 

received 244 

Continue  till  received    .     245 
Should   transfer   Mem- 
bership   when     they 

remove 245 

Jilinisters,  what  ....     245 
Not    Successors    of 

Priests 245 


Page 
Iklinisters,  continued. 

Nor  of  Apostles  ...  246 

Of  equal  Rank    .     .     .  246 

CalHiig  of 247 

Authority  of,  what  .     .  249 
People  may  do  the  Work 

they  neglect     .     .     .  250 
Shoiild  submit  to  Cen- 

siu-e  of  Church     .     .  250 

HoAv  dismissed    .     .     .  251 

How  deposed  ....  251 

Character  not  indelible  253 
May    they     administer 
Seals  where  they  are 

not  Pastors  ?     .     .     .  254 
Give  themselves  to  their 

Work 257 

Should   not  be  Magis- 
trates   257 

Maintenance  of    .     .     .  258 

Refusing  to  support .     .  260 

Set  apart 260 

Ministry  learned,  &c.  .  .261 
Minorities'  Rights  .  .  .  261 
Missionary  Work  .  .  .  262 
Negative  Vote  ....  262 
New  England  ....  262 
Non- communion  .  .  .  263 
Nonconformists,  Indepen- 
dent for  Toleration  .  263 
Nonconfbrmitv,     Reasons 

for      ..'....  263 

Obstacles  to     ...     .  264 

Oath 265 

Offences 266 

Offerings 206 

Office,  not  in  Electors  .     .  266 

Officer,  may  a  Church  call 

one  of  another  Church 

to  preside  ?  .     .     .     .  266 

Officers,  Church,  what     .  266 

Their  Qualifications      .  267 

Not  the  Church   ...  269 

Chosen  by  the  People    .  269 

Chosen  for  Life    ...  271 

Limited  to  the  Qualified  271 

Elected,  trvdy  Officers  .  271 

Not  to  be  multiplied      .  272 

Of  God's  appointpient  .  272 

For  what  deposed  ?  ,    .  272 


CONTENTS, 


Page 

Officers,  Clmrch,  continitccU 
Servants  of  the  Church  273 
Abdicate,  if  neglect  duty  273 
Ordinances,  Perpetuity  of  273 
Ordination,  what     .     .     .  274 
To  a  particular  Church  275 
Of  Missionaries   .     .     .  278 
By  Succession  unneces- 
sary      279 

Conveys  no  Power  .     .  280 
Is  a  Council  necessary  to?  280 
None  but  Election  indis- 
pensable   281 

By  Ministers   ....  282 

By  Presbytery     .     .     ,  283 

By  the  People      ...  285 

Mode  of 290 

Method  of  keeping  a  day 

of 291 

Mode  of  objecting  to      .  291 

Should  it  be  repeated  ?  .  292 

Parish,  not  a  Church   .     .  292 

Pastor,  his  Duties    .     .     .  292 

Has  he  a  Negative  Yote  ?  294 

Power  to  elect  in  Church  295 

Mode  of  his  Election     .  296 

How  dismissed  f  .     .     .  ,297 

Not  lightly  removed      .  '297 
Is  he  censurable  by  his 

Church?      ....  299 
Is  he  a  Member  of  his 

Church?       .    •.     .     .  301 

CoUeague 302 

Peace 302 

Perfection  in  Churches     .  303 
Persecution,  what  justifies 

Dispersion?      .     .     .  303 
On  account  of  Congre- 
gationalism      .     .     .  304 
Platform,  Cambridge  .     .  305 

Saybrook 306 

Platforms,  of  what  Autho- 
rity?    306 

Poor  of  the  Church     .     .  308 
Power,  what,  can  a  Church 

give  ? 309 

Apostolical      .          .     .  309 

In  Ministry  or  Brethren  ?  309 

Cannot  be  alienated  .     .  311 

Practice  of  the  Apostles    .  312 


Pnge 
Prayer  prescribed    .     .     ,  312 
May  it  be  joined  in  ?      ,  313 
Unprofitable    .     .     .     .  314 
Preach,  who  may?  .     .     .  314 
Preaching,  means  of  Sal- 
vation       316 

May  it  be  heard  from 

Christian  Errorists  ?  .  316 
Prelacy    prevents    not 

Schism 316 

Presbytery,  what     .     .     .  316 

Use  of 317 

Supposed  Power  of  .     .  317 

Church  has  Power  over  318 

Priests,  Ministers  not  .     .  318 

Principles,  Congregational  318 

Private  Judgment   .     .     .  318 

Profession  of  Faith      .     .  319 

Prophesying,  ordinary      .  319 

Regulated 321 

Pulpit,  controlled    .     .     .  323 

Recommendation     .     .     .  323 

Repentance,  manifested    .  323 

Churches,  Judges  of      .  324 

Manifested,     may    a 

Church  exclude  ?  .     .  324 

Resistance 324 

Restoration  of  Penitent    .  329 

Reverend 329 

Sabbath,  Discipline  on      .  330 

Sabbath  Schools      .     .     .  330 

Saint 330 

Savoy  Confession    .     .     .  330 

Schism 331 

Scriptures,  Guide  to  Order  333 

Seals,  what 335 

May  a  Chiurch  authorize 

to  administer  ? .  335 

Menabers  have  a  Right  to  336 

Separation,  what     .     .     .  336 

May  not  be  Schism  .     .  336 

Reasons  of 338 

Cause  of 339 

When  reqtured    .     .     .  341 

When  condemned    .     .  343 
Not  by  Congregational- 

ists 344 

Separatists 346 

Separatists,  Semi     .     .     .  346 

Sermons 347 


SIl 


G  0  N  T  E  N  T  S. 


Vnge 

Sign  of  the  Cross     .     .     .  348 

Singing 348 

Standing  Committees  .     .  349 

Subscription 349 

Succession,  Church      ,     .  350 

Ministerial       .     .     .     .  350 

Suspension,  Pastoral    .     .  351 

Church 351 

Suspicion 352 

Synods,  not  juridical  .     .  352 

Of  whom  constituted  ?  .  356 

Not  legislative      .     .     .  356 

For  what  lawful?      .     .  356 
May    not    excommujii- 

cate 358 

Standing,  denounced    .  358 

Cautions  concerning     ,  359 

Subordination  of      .     .  359 

Swearing 360 

Teacher,  his  Office  ...  360 

Is  he  distinct  from  Pa  stor  ?  360 

Tithes 362 

Toleration  desired    .     .     .  362 

Why  not  universal  .     .  364: 
How  far  should  it  be 

practised  by  a  State  ?  366 


Page 

Tradition,  Apostolic     .     .  373 

Superstitious  ....  373 

Translation 373 

Treasury 374 

Types 374 

Unanimity 375 

Uniformity     .     .     •     ,     .  375 

Union,  Scriptural    .     .     .  376 

Of  Christians  .     .     .     .  377 

Unity,  Church,  what  .     .  377 

When  perfect ....  378 

Usurpation 379 

Veto 379 

Voters,  who  are  ?     .     .     ,  380 

Restriction  of .     .     .     ,  380 

War 380 

Westminster  Assembly    .  381 

Widows 382 

Witchcraft 382 

Withdrawing  Communion  385 

From  Communion    .     .  385 

To  other  Churches    .     .  386 

Women's  Rights     ...  387 

Worship 388 

Bbief  Notices  .    •    .    •  389 


DICTIONARY. 


ACCUSATION,  in  discipline,  should  not  be  re- 
ceived, unless  on  the  testimony/  of  two  or  three  wit- 
nesses*^—  Mere  rumor  may  justify  inquiry  on  the 
part  of  the  church,  but  is  not  a  sufficient  basis  on 
which  to  proceed  to  formal  acts  of  discipline.^  A 
question  has  been  raised,  whether  the  testimony  of 
several  witnesses,  each  to  a  separate  act  of  the  same 
general  nature,  should  be  received,  and  made  the 
basis  of  church  action.^  Some  modern  writers 
have  maintained,  that  charges  may  be  entertained, 
founded  on  general  rumor ;  ^  but,  however  the 
usages  of  other  denominations  may  sanction  such 
a  course,  it  seems  inconsistent  with  the  spirit  and 
usages  of  Congregationalism.  Cotton  Mather  * 
asserts,  that,  should  a  member  fall  into  scandalous 
transgressions,  and  it  be  at  once  a  matter  of  public 
fame,  the  pastor  inquires  into  it,  and  brings  it  im- 

♦  By  parity  of  reason,  we  infer  that  an  accusation  ought  not 
to  be  brought,  nor  be  suffered  to  be  brought,  unless  there  are  two 
or  three  witnesses.  It  seems  that  this  is  one  of  the  reasons  why 
one  or  two  brethren  are  to  be  taken  with  the  accuser,  in  the  se- 
cond step,  viz.  that  they  may  either  be  witnesses  themselves,  or 
see  that  there  are  competent  witnesses  of  the  facts  specified. 
2 


14  ADMONITION. 

mediately  under  ecclesiastical  cognizance.  —  See 
Accused,  Rights  'of;  Discipline  ;  Elder,  Accusa- 
tion against 

1  Goodwin,  Cli.  Gov.  129;  Mitchell,  Guide,  103.    *  ib.    a  i^. 
note.     ■*  Congregational  Manual,  35,  36.     ^  Rat.  Dis.  141,  142. 

ACCUSED,  Rights  o/.  — There  is  great  lack  of 
definiteness  on  this  point  in  our  treatises  on  church 
government.  One  reason  for  this  may  be  the  uni- 
versally admitted  principle  of  Congregationalism, — 
Whatever  is  the  dictate  of  nature  is  the  law  of  God. 
Their  right  to  a  distinct  specification  of  the  charges 
to  be  brought  against  them,  of  the  witnesses  to  be 
confronted,  to  a  proper  time  to  prepare  for  their 
defence,  and  to  a  trial  and  decision  without  unne- 
cessary delay ;  in  a  word,  to  all  the  privileges  which 
appertain  to  persons  justly  adjudged  at  other  tribu- 
nals, belongs  to  them.  Mitchell  ^  says  charges  should 
be  distinctly  specified  and  seasonably  communi- 
cated to  the  accused,  commonly  in  writing.  Cro- 
well,  in  his  Church  Member's  Manual,^  shows  that 
he  must  not  be  condemned  but  on  the  testimony  of 
some  witness  besides  the  complainant ;  and  Cam- 
bridge Platform  ^  and  other  treatises  show  conclu- 
sively that  they  have  a  right  to  the  first  and  second 
steps  pointed  out  in  Matt,  xviii.,  though  some  make 
an  exception  in  case  of  public  offences.-^  See  Dis- 
cipline; Suspension.  ' 
»  Guide,  102.    ^  Pages  234—237.    '  Chap.  xiv. 

ADMONITION  loas  formerly  considered  as  an 
indispensable  act  of  the  church,  preceding  excommuni- 


ADMONITION.  15 

cation.^  —  The  Puritans  in  Holland  "  practised  no 
church  censures  but  admonition,  and  exconimunica- 
tion  for  obstinate  offenders."  ^  The  nineteenth  arti- 
cle of  the  Savoy  Declaration  says :  "  The  censures 
appointed  by  Christ  are  admonition  and  excommu- 
nication." It  directs  that  those  who  know  the  facts 
"first  admonish  the  offender  in  private;"  and,  in 
case  of  non-amendment,  "  the  offence  being  related 
to  the  church,  and  the  offender  not  manifesting  his 
repentance,  he  is  to  be  duly  admonished  in  the 
name  of  Christ  by  the  whole  church,  —  by  the  mini- 
stry of  the  elders  of  the  church."  ^  Cotton  Mather"* 
describes  the  manner  in  which  public  admonitions 
w^ere  performed  in  his  day  in  the  New  England 
churches,  by  the  pastor  (in  behalf  of  the  church) 
summoning  the  delinquent,  and  the  church  proceed- 
ing to  excommunicate  him,  provided  he  contemp- 
tuously refused  to  appear  and  be  admonished.  He 
gives  the  substance  of  a  form  of  such  public  admo- 
nition, and  says  that  private  Christians  then  visited 
"  the  delinquent,  and  followed  up  the  g-ood  effects 
of  the  admonition  upon  him."  Letchford^  says 
that  "the  admonished  must  abstain  from  commu- 
nion and  satisfy  the  church,  else  excommunication 
follows."  Dr.  Dwight^  says:  "  Should  the  accused 
person  be  found  guilty  of  the  fault  laid  to  his  charge, 
it  becomes  the  duty  of  the  church  solemnly  to  ad- 
monish him  of  his  sin,  and  the  absolute  necessity 
of  atoning  for  it,  by  making  proper  reparation,  with 
the  spirit  of  the  gospel."  Upham  ^  and  Cambridge 
Platform  ^  assert,  that  "  if  the  church  discern  him 
to  be  willing  to  hear,  yet  not  fully  convinced  of  his 


16  AFFINITY. 

offence,  as  in  case  of  heresy,  they  are  to  dispense 
to  him  a  public  admonition ;  which,  declaring  the 
offender  to  lie  under  the  public  offence  of  the  church, 
doth  thereby  withhold  or  suspend  him  from  the  holy 
fellowship  of  the  Lord's  supper,  till  his  offence  be 
removed  by  public  confession."  (This  supposes  the 
first  and  second  steps  to  have  been  taken.)  "  If  he 
still  continue  obstinate,  they  are  to  cast  him  out  by 
excommunication."  Punchard  ^  says  :  "  But  if  un- 
successful (i.e.  the  measures  of  the  church  to  reclaim 
the  offender),  the  church,  after  suitable  delay,  pro- 
ceed to  admonish  him,  to  suspend  him  from  their 
communion,  or  to  excommunicate  and  cut  him  off 
from  all  connection  with  the  church." 

*  Discipline  of  Visible  Church,  by  Clyfton  or  Smith,  in  Pun- 
chard, Hist.  371  ;  Hanbury,  i.  32.  ^  Apol.  Nar.  of  Indepen.  in  W. 
Assembly  in  Neal's  Pur.  i.  492,  and  Han.  ii.  224.  ^  Han.  iii.  547. 
*  Rat.  Dis.  145—148.  ^  In  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Col.,  series  iii.  vol. 
iii.  73.  ^  Works,  Serm.  clxii.  '  Rat.  Disc.  139.  •*  Ch.  xiv.  sect.  2. 
»  View,  179. 

AFFINITY,  is  it  a  sufficient  cause  for  either  multi- 
plying'  churches  in  the  same  place,  or  transferring' 
mevibers  to  other  churches  ? — It  often  occurs  that 
diversities  of  opinion  and  practice,  in  matters  not 
strictly  fundamental,  cause  a  portion  of  the  church 
to  feel,  that  they  had  better  either  organize  into  a 
distinct  church,  or  transfer  their  relations  to  some 
other  church.  It  is  a  mooted  question,  whether  this 
alone  is  a  sufficient  ground  for  such  organization 
or  such  transfer  of  relation.  John  Robinson  and 
William  Brewster  give  it  as  their  opinion,  in  coun- 
cil, on  the  Ainsworth  and  Johnson  controversy,  that 


AFFINITY.  17 

it  would  have  been  better  to  have  dismissed  in 
peace  than  to  have  made  their  brethren  their  adver- 
saries. .  .  .  The  Johnsonians  insisted,  that,  if  the 
Ainsworthians  were  dismissed,  they  should  remove 
out  of  the  place.  The  latter  pleaded  a  pecuniary 
necessity  for  remaining.^  Cambridge  Platform " 
says:  "If  a  member's  departure  be  manifesf.y  un- 
safe and  sinful,  the  church  may  not  consent  there- 
unto ;  for,  in  so  doing,  they  should  not  act  in  faith. 
...  If  the  case  be  doubtful,  and  the  person  not  to  be 
persuaded,  it  seemeth  best  to  leave  the  matter  to 
God,  and  not  forcibly  to  detain  him."  The  authors 
of  the  Congregational  Manual  recommend  leaving 
such  a  case  to  a  council.^  Cleveland's  Narrative 
and  Conduct  of  the  Fourth  Church  in  Ipswich 
maintains,  that,  if  particular  persons  cannot  agree 
with  the  major  part,  they  may  withdraw,  if  the 
church  refuse  to  dismiss  them.^  So  Owen.  —  See 
Withdrawing  to  other  churches. 

In  these  cases,  personal  liberty  is  usually  pleaded, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  the  evil  of  separation,  with 
the  wrong  which  the  church  would  sanction  by 
dismissing,  on  the  other.  This  practical  difficulty 
is  most  satisfactorily  obviated  in  the  Answer  of  the 
N(^w  England  Elders  to  the  nine  positions  sent  out 
to  them  by  divers  reverend  and  godly  ministers  in 
England.  They  show,^  that  in  such  a  case  the 
churches  dissuade  from  removing,  and  show  the 
sin,  and  do  not  consent  if  it  seem  wrong  to  them, 
but  "  suspend  their  vote  against  him,  as  not  will- 
ing, against  his  will,  to  detain  him,  abhorring  to 
make  our  churches  places  of  restraint  and  impri- 


18  AFFINITY. 

sonment."  This  was  made  a  practical  rule  with 
our  forefathers.  It  was  applied  in  several  cases, 
and  once  to  no  less  a  personage  than  John  Daven- 
port (see  remarks  on  his  case  in  art.  Pastors  not 
lightly  removed).  An  adjourned  ex-parte  council 
in  Concord,  in  1743,  advise  the  church,  in  failure 
of  bringing  their  pastor  to  repentance,  "to  with- 
draw from  his  ministry,  and  seek  gospel  ordinances 
elseivhere}''  T.  Goodwin  advocates  the  same  prin- 
ciples.^ Isaac  Chauncy  asserts  ^  that  "  a  church 
may  deny  a  dismission  to  one  under  church  deal- 
ing, or  when  he  desires  it  at  large  to  the  world  or 
to  a  false  church.  But  if  he  asks  a  dismission  to 
a  church  of  the  same  order,  and  gives  no  satisfac- 
tory reason,  and  remains  peremptory,  the  church 
ought  not  to  refuse  the  granting  of  it.  For  this  is 
to  make  a  church  a  prison,  to  lord  it  over  God's 
heritage,  to  lay  a  stumbling-block  in  his  way, 
tempting  him  to  schism,  destroying  his  edification ; 
for  he  cannot  edify  by  means  he  is  forcibly  kept 
under.  It  is  contrary  to  the  golden  rule,  and  may 
cause  a  root  of  bitterness  that  may  affect  many. 
If,  upon  all  due  means,  the  church  will  grant  no 
dismission,  the  member  refused  may  join  another 
church  as  a  non-member."  —  See  Dismission,  may  a 
church  receive  members  without  ?  Schism,  Separa- 
tion. 

^  Testimony  of  the  Elders  of  the  Church  in  Leyden,  in  Han.  i. 
255;  and  Works,  iii.  471—475.  ^  Chap.  xiii.  sec.  3.  ^  Page  33. 
*  Page  38.  »  Page  74.  ^  Ch.  Gov.  394,  395.  '  Divine  Institution 
of  Congregational  Churches,  120,  121. 


AGREEMENT.  19 

AGREEMENT  of  Congregationalists.~—We  are 
often    represented    as    peculiar    for    disagreement 
among  ourselves,  relative  to  our  own   distinctive 
principles.     We,  however,  challenge  an  instance  of 
more  perfect  agreement  among  the  people  of  any 
other  denomination.     Cotton   Mather^  comments 
on  five  distinctive  points,  on  which  he  affirms  that 
we  are  all  agreed.     In  substance  they  are  these : 
The  right  of  Christians  to  associate  for  the  worship 
of  God  —  Those  thus  associated  are  an  instituted 
church — Their  chosen  pastors  have  a  right  to  ad- 
minister the  sacraments  —  Churches  ought  to  pay 
great  regard  to  the  advice  of  other  churches ;  and, 
"  The   Sacred  Scriptures  are  the  sufficient  rule  for 
belief,  worship,  and  manners  among  the  people  of 
God."     Minor   differences,  particularly  about    the 
application  of  the  Scripture  standard  to  individual 
cases,  of  course  exist  where  there  is  a  perfectly  ac- 
knowledged right  of  private  judgment;  but  there 
is  equal  diversity  relative  to  the  application  of  the 
particular  standards  of  other  denominations.    Some, 
who  take  hold  of  our  skirts  and  would  be  called  by 
our  name,  would  impose  on  us  other  standards  than 
the  Scriptures ;  but  from  the  beginning  it  was  not 
so.     Even  the  framers  of  the  Saybrook  Platform 
did  not  claim  to  be  strict  Congregationalists.^   Ains- 
worth  retorts  on  those  who  taunted  on  him  the  dis- 
agreement  of   Congregationalists,  "  Your   persua- 
sions are  to  make  us  believe,  that,  because  there  are 
sins  in  Zion,  there  are  none  in  Babylon."  ^     Rev. 
C.  Upham  ^  quotes  Gov.  Endicot's  letter  to  Gov. 
Bradford,  showing  that  he  learned  from  Dr.  Fuller 


20  AMUSEMENTS. 

that  they  of  Plymouth  held  the  same  doctrine  with 
himself,  "  being  far  from  the  common  report  that 
hath  been  spread  of  you."  Punchard  *  says :  "  After 
a  somewhat  careful  examination  of  the  writings  of 
all  those  worthy  men,  our  ecclesiastical  ancestors, 
I  feel  justified  in  saying,  that,  although  they  differ 
among  themselves,  and  from  modern  Congrega- 
tionalists,  on  some  minor  points,  yet  in  the  essen- 
tials of  our  polity  there  is  a  most  remarkable  agree- 
ment among,  them  all  with  what  is  now  deemed 
sound  Congregationalism." — See  Congregahon- 
ALisM,  epitome  of  principles. 

'  Rat.  Dis.  Introduction,  pp.  8—10.  ^  Trumbull's  Hist,  c* 
Conn.  i.  486,  487,  493.  ^  In  Han.  i.  99.  *  Note  in  his  Dedica- 
tion Sermon,  43.     ^  View,  27. 


AMUSEMENTS.  — The  old  Puritan  Congrega- 
tionalists  have  always  been  distinguished  for  their 
^  aversion  to  vain  amusements.  Thev  made  a  stand 
against  the  Book  of  Sports  of  King  James  I.,  which, 
to  please  the  rabble  and  break  down  the  discipline  of 
the  godly,  authorized  such  sports  even  on  the  Lord's 
day.^  Though  Prynne  and  other  godly  Presbyte- 
rians were  valiant  for  and  suffered  deeply  in  the 
same  cause,  yet  it  w^as  the  Independents  who  suf- 
fered most  deeply  as  a  body.  They  fully  approved 
of  Prynne's  "  Histrio-Mastix  or  Player's  Scourge, 
wherein  it  is  evidenced,  by  divers  arguments,  that 
popular  stage-plays  are  sinful,  heathenish,  lewd,  and 
ungodly  spectacles."  ^  This  had  much  to  do  with 
exiling  them  to  Holland.  Hence  they  came  here, 
not  only  loathing  such  amusements  in  their  con- 


AMUSEMENTS.  21 

sciences,  but  smarting  under  the  effects  of  them  on 
their  own  religious  liberties  and  privileges.  The 
Histrio-Mastix  was  published  in  1,006  pages  quarto, 
and  shows,  even  from  multitudes  of  heathen  writers, 
that  stage-plays  were  of  the  most  infamous  origin, 
and  were  most  pernicious  in  their  effects,  condemned 
by  the  moral,  and  productive  only  of  sensuality  and 
crime.  He  shows  that  they  were  prohibited  by  a 
multitude  of  early  councils,  and  that  members  were 
excluded  from  the  primitive  churches  for  either  par- 
ticipating in  them  or  attending  them.  He  also  in- 
cidentally shows  the  same  of  dancing,  in  numerous 
instances,  as  may  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  table 
at  the  end  of  his  volume.  He  admits  ^  that  we  may 
sometimes  need  recreations, —  as  after  sickness  or 
fatigue  or  hard  study,  but  denies  that  we  need  it  in 
plays,  or  in  any  unlawful  employments.  In  the 
whole  work  he  calls  up  the  united  testimony  of 
heaven,  earth,  and  hell,  to  show  the  iniquity  of  thea- 
tres and  vain  amusements.  For  this  he  lost  his 
ears.  Dr.  John  Rainolds  (or  Reynolds),  in  his 
*'  Overthrow  of  Stage  Plays,"  shows  their  libidi- 
nous and  other  evil  tendencies,  abundantly  demon- 
strating their  injurious  effects  by  the  testimony  of 
heathen  writers,  as  well  as  of  holy  writ.  He  also 
incidentally  shows  that  promiscuous  dancing  tends 
to  the  same  evils. 

Dr.  Ames  *  says :  "  If  there  were  any  that  did  not 
dare  to  be  at  stage-plays,  nor  swear  lustily  on  trivial 
occasions  or  in  ordinary  discourse,  nor  drink  wine 
until  he  stared  in  pledging  the  cup,  nor  frequent 
masking,  dice,  or  revelling,  he  should  presently  have 


22  ANOINTING. 

no  other  name  than  Puritan."  Prince  informs  us,* 
that  the  same  Dr.  Ames  was  obliged  to  flee  to  the 
continent  for  preaching  against  playing  cards  and 
dice,  Philip  Stubbs,  in  his  "  Anatomic  of  Abuses," 
strikingly  illustrates  the  evils  of  promiscuous  dan- 
cing, stage-plays,  cards,  dice,  &c.  Rev.  T.  Allen, 
afterwards  of  Charlestown,  Mass.,  refused  to  read 
the  Book  of  Sports,  when  the  clergy  were  required 
to  do  so,  and  lost  his  parish  (St.  Edmunds,  in  Cam- 
bridge, Eng.)  by  order  of  Bishop  Wren.*^  President 
Chauncy  displeased  Bishop  Laud,  by  preaching 
against  the  Book  of  Sports,  &c.^  —  See  Dancing. 

»  Han.  i.  358,  359.  ^  Han.  i.  512.  ^  Pages  945—948.  -*  Pref. 
to  Bradshaw's  English  Puritanism.  *  Chronology,  29.  ^  Eliot, 
Biog.  Diet.  20.     '  lb.  98. 

A'NOINTmG  ivith  oil.  — Thos.  Goodwin  (styled 
the  Father  of  Congregationalism,  though  it  is  be- 
lieved to  have  bad  even  a  far  more  illustrious  ori- 
gin) devotes  the  eleventh  chapter  of  the  seventh 
book  of  his  treatise  on  Church  Government^  to  this 
subject.  He  maintains  that  the  dealing  promised 
in  James,  v.  14,  15,  was  not  miraculous,  but  only  a 
blessing  accompanying  the  prayers  of  the  elders, 
in  the  use  of  an  appointed  ordinance,  which  he 
argues  to  be  still  in  force.  Isaac  Chauncy^  main- 
tains that  the  directions  for  anointing  were,  by  a 
synecdoche,  equivalent  to  requiring  the  use  of  out- 
ward means,  to  be  accompanied  with  prayer. 
Goodwin,  in  his  Catechism,^  how^ever,  admits  that 
the  ordinance  has  ceased,  and  that  the  promise 
never  was  of  universal  application,  though  it  put 


APOSTLES.  23 

great  honor  on  the  elders  to  be  thus  the  medium 
of  special  blesr'jigs  to  the  sick.  From  this  time, 
anointing,  as  an  ordinance,  seems  to  have  become 
perfectly  obsolete  in  the  Congregational  churches. 

»  Pages  387—390.     ^  Ans.  to  Goodwin,  3—30.     ^  Page  22. 


APOSTLES  not  bishops.  — John  Milton*  shows 
conclusively,  that  the  apostles  could  not  possibly 
have  been  bishops  by  office,  i.e.  moderators  or  go- 
vernors of  the  churches,  and  so  that  modern  dio- 
cesan bishops  are  no  successors  of  the  apostles. 
Dr.  Bacon,  in  his  Church  Manual,  most  happily 
illustrates  this  point,  showing  that  though  they  had 
certain  duties  to  perform,  yet  they  were  not  officers 
in  any  churches.  They  had  "Bishoprics"  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures ;  but  these  had  little  or  no 
analogy  to  the  supposed  duties  and  prerogatives  of 
modern  prelates. —  See  Bishops. 

»  Eikonoklastes,  135.     ^  Pages  30—36. 

APOSTLES,  English  bishops  cannot  trace  their 
succession  from.  —  Hanbury  *  shows  that  this  is 
admitted  by  Archbishop  Usher,  Geraldus,  and  Stil- 
lingfleet;  and  by  them  their  succession  is  made  to 
depend  only  on  common  fame,  owing  to  the  loss 
of  records  in  the  English  church.  It  ,would  be  an 
endless  task  to  attempt  even  a  synopsis  of  the  con- 
troversies on  this  point.  I  therefore  only  give  iac 
above  admissions  of  episcopal  champions.  —  See 
Bishops. 

iVol.  i.  166. 


24  APPEALS. 

APPEALS  from  the  decision  of  churches  are  urt" 
necessary,  —  Thomas  Goodwin  '  shows  that  they 
are  not  recpiired  by  the  law  of  natupe  ;  for  they  did 
not  exist  either  in  the  patriarchal  or  the  Jewish 
code.  Neither  do  they  exist  in  some  of  the  reformed 
churches  of  Europe,  nor  even  in  matters  of  life  and 
death  in  civil  courts.  They  cannot  consistently  go 
before  sentence ;  for  this  would  deprive  the  church 
of  the  power  of  sentence,  and  the  delinquent  will 
lack  the  means  of  his  conversion,  until  the  matter 
has  run  through  all  the  courts  of  appeals.  Nor  can 
they  follow  the  sentence,  because  it  is  bound  in 
heaven,  unless  the  delinquent  repents,^  and  also 
because  the  church  would  thus  give  up  the  autho 
rity  with  which  Christ  has  entrusted  them. 

J.  Davenport  shows  ^  that  they  are  endless  in 
their  practical  application ;  for,  if  the  principle  is 
once  admitted,  there  is  no  consistent  stopping-place 
short  of  a  general  oecumenical  council,  which  may 
not  assemble  for  an  age.  Richard  Mather  and  W. 
Tompson  *  press  the  same  argument  concerning 
appeals  to  discipline  churches.  John  Wise,^  doubt- 
less referring  to  Matt,  xviii.,  says :  There  is  appa- 
rently some  great  fallacy  in  the  objection  (i.e.  to 
the  ultimate  power  resting  in  the  church),  or  cer- 
tainly our  blessed  Saviour  did  not  state  his  cases 
right."  Hanbury  ^  speaks  of  T.  Edwards,  in  his 
Reasons  against  the  Independents,  as  resting  the 
necessity  of  a  court  of  appeal  on  the  precedent  of 
the  church  at  Antioch,  "  but  forgetting  that  they 
were  not  members  of  that  church  that  caused  the 
dissension."     Katharine  Ohidley,  in  her  answer  to 


APPEALS.  25 

Edwards/  says:  "This  chapter  (Acts  xv.),  above 
all  the  chapters  that  I  can  find,  proves  Indepen- 
dency. The  church  of  Antioch  judged  it  an  un- 
equal thing  for  them  to  judge  the  members  of  the 
church  of  Jerusalem." 

Dr.  Emmons  ^  says :  "  Christ  here  gives  no  direc- 
tion to  the  censured  person  to  appeal  to  any  higher 
tribunal,  .  .  .  nor  to  the  church  to  call  a  council  for 
advice.  The  censured  person  has  no  right  of  appeal, 
.  .  .  because  there  is  no  higher  tribunal  on  earth  to 
which  he  can  appeal.  .  .  .  There  must  be  a  final  de-  . 
cision,  and  the  church  must  make  it."  His  reason-  ♦ 
ing  looks  like  not  allowing  the  aggrieved  a  right  to 
seek  admission  to  other  churches ;  but  this  was  not 
probably  his  meaning. 

*  Ch.  Gov.  197 — 200.  ^  See  Excommunication,  what  ?  ^  Power 
of  Cong.  Churches,  in  Han.  ii.  65.  *  In  ib.  174.  *  Vindic.  54. 
«  Vol.  ii.  103.  '  In  ib.  109.  »  Platform  estab.  by  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  in  Works,  v.  454. 

APPEALS,  hoiv  far  alloived  in  strict  congrega- 
tional discipline.  —  John  Wise,  in  his  Vindication,* 
shows  that  the  first  trial  is  at  the  bar  of  the  delin- 
quent's own  conscience :  "  If  he  hear  thee,  thou  hast 
gained  a  brother ; "  thence  there  is  an  appeal  to  one 
or  two  more ;  and,  if  he  neglect  to  hear  them,  there 
is  an  appeal  to  the  church,  which  is  the  highest 
tribunal  known  in  the  word  of  God.  Thomas 
Goodwin^  acknowledges  the  right  of  appeal  to 
other  churches,  in  case  of  mal-administration ;  but 
their  decision  is  not  to  be  received  with  implicit 
faith.  XJpham  ^  recognizes  the  right  of  appeal,  in 
the  last  resort,  to  the  churches  a*t  large,  through  the 
3 


26  APPROBATION. 

medium  of  an  ex-parte  council.  A  thousand  and 
one  disquisitions,  maintaining  juridical  appeals, 
may  be  found,  fathered  by  so  called  Congregational 
writers  ;  but  almost  or  quite  every  one  of  them 
bears  date  as  late  as  the  commencement  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  —  For  the  whole  subject  of  ap- 
peals, see  further.  Councils,  Synods. 

»  Pages  52—54.     ^  Ch.  Gov.  202.     =»  Ratio  Disciplinse,  sec.  175. 

APPROBATION  to  preach.  — 'When  candidates 
for  the  pastoral  office  go  out  to  preach  the  gospel, 
it  is  desirable  that  they  have  letters  of  commenda- 
tion from  some  who  are  known  to  the  churches. 
Formerly,  the  churches  thus  recommended  those 
who  went  out  from  them.^  About  the  year  1705, 
"  Proposals "  were  made  by  certain  ministers  to 
have  the  churches  give  their  power  to  do  this  into 
the  hands  of  ministerial  associations.^  This  custom 
has  now,  by  innovation,  generally  prevailed  among 
the  New  England  Congregationalists ;  some  asso- 
ciations giving  a  mere  recommendation,  and  others 
a  formal  license,  to  preach  the  gospel.  It  is,  how- 
ever, an  encroachment  on  ancient  usages  and  prin- 
ciples, which  maintain  that  it  was  not  a  matter  of 
necessity ;  and  that  to  hold  it  necessary  was  "  to 
deny  Christians  their  liberty,  and  assume  the  in- 
fallible chair."  ^  Stoddard  (who  differed  from  most 
New  England  ministers)  argues  in  his  Instituted 
Churches,*  that  it  belongs  to  synods  to  appoint 
oersons  to  examine  candidates  for  the  ministry,  yet 
lot  to  abridge  the  churches  of  their  liberty.  In 
;he  petition  of  the  church  and  town  of  Woburn  to 


ASSOCIATIONS.  27 

the  General  Court,  Aug.  30,  1653,"  they  say :  "  If 
a  church  has  liberty  of  election  and  ordination,  then 
it  has  the  power  of  approbation  also."  The  result 
was  a  repeal  of  an  order  which  had  passed  the 
General  Court,  that  ministers  should  be  approbated, 
by  a  council,  or  by  the  county  court.^  Punchard 
says  ^  that  the  first  suggestion  on  this  subject,  so 
far  as  he  has  discovered,  came  from  the  united 
brethren,  Congregational  and  Presbyterian,  in  Eng- 
land, in  1692 ;  but  the  above  petition  shows  an 
earlier  date  by  a  Massachusetts  law,  which  was 
subsequently  repealed.  John  Owen,^  in  his  Duty 
of  Pastor  and  People,  chap,  vii.,  asserts  that  private 
Christians  have  a  right  to  make  known  whatever 
is  revealed  (i.e.  made  clear)  to  them,  and,  if  called 
in  Providence  (as,  for  instance,  being  shipwrecked 
on  an  island),  to  preach  the  gospel. —  See  Pun- 
chard's  View,  199,  200 ;  and  Upham's  Ratio  Dis- 
cipIinsB,  55,  117 — 123.  See  also  Associations, 
License  (in  particular),  Prophesying,  Preach  ivho 
may  ? 

1  Wise's  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Espoused,  124—128.  » ib. 
^  OHver  Cromwell,  in  Neal's  Hist.  Puritans,  ii.  116.  *  Page  34. 
^  In  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Col.,  series  iii.  vol.  i.  42.  ^  Ib.  39.  '  View, 
199.     »  Works,  xix.  43—47. 

ASSOCIATIONS,   their  rise    and   province. — 
About  the  year  1675,  perhaps  earlier,*  after  great 

*  President  Stiles,  says  about  1670.  Note  to  Convention  Ser- 
mon, page  68.  A  manuscript-book  has  been  recently  deposited 
in  the  library  of  the  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  by  Rev.  Dr.  William  Jenks 
from  the  Hon".  Judge  White,  of  Salem,  containing  the  constitu- 
tion and  records  of  an  association  formed  in  Bodmin  in  Cornwall, 


28  ASSOCIATIONS. 

desolations  by  the  Indian  wars,  the  neighboring 
ministers  in  several  counties  in  New  England  met 
together  to  pray ;  anci  subsequently  they  began  to 
discuss  subjects  of  common  interest  at  their  meet- 
ings. At  length,  some  "  presbyterially  inclined " 
ministers  began  to  dignify  their  meetings  with  the 
name  of"  Classes.''  Thus  matters  progressed  until, 
II  1705,  an  effort  was  made  by  one  of  these  asso- 
ciations to  combine  all  the  ministers  in  the  country 
into  similar  bodies,  for  the  purpose  of  establishing 
a  consociation \vith  powers  similar  to  those  after- 
wards claimed  by  the  consociations  of  Connecticut. 
They  issued  their  proposals,  bearing  date  Nov.  5, 

Sept.  9,  1655.  Their  record  of  proceedings  continues  till  May  4, 
1659,  which  was  on  the  eve  of  the  restoration.  Charles  Morton, 
afterwards  of  Charlestown,  Mass.,  was  one  of  the  members.  They 
voted  to  ordain  three  ministers  in  December  and  January,  1656-7, 
*'  being  satisfied  with  their  qualifications."  But  whether  they 
were  ordained  as  pastors  or  evangelists,  the  record  does  not  in- 
form us. 

The  same  volume  also  contains  the  constitution  and  records 
of  Cambridge  Association,  which  was  formed  at  the  house  of  the 
same  Charles  Morton,  in  Charlestown,  Mass.,  Oct.  13,  1690.  On 
the  records  are  found  votes,  passed  Feb.  23,  1690-1,  recommend- 
ing the  ordination  of  evangelists ;  and  that  the  candidates  for 
such  ordination  be  "  recommended  by  the  churches  of  which  they 
are  members  to  the  adjoining  eldership  for  their  ordination."  MS. 
p.  40.  It  appears  that  they  received  a  communication  from  **  the 
ministers  of  the  county  of  Essex,  Nov.  2,  1691."  MS.  p.  41. 
March  6,  1692,  *' Voted  that  letters  be  written  to  the  other  asso- 
ciations," &c.  The  records  in  this  volume  continue  till  1701,  and 
contain  some  scattered  notes  of  a  later  date.  This  is  doubtless 
the  association  from  which  issued  the  *•  Proposals "  referred  to 
above.  In  these  records  are  the  originals  of  most  of  the  votes  of 
the  ministers  at  Cambridge,  reported  by  Mather  in"  his  Magnalia, 
book  V.  vol.  ii.  pp.  212—237. 


ASSOCIATIONS.  29 

1705/  These  proposals  were  successfully  resisted 
by  "  divers  godly  ministers "  at  the  time,^  though 
they  afterwards  prevailed,  by  the  interference  of 
state  authority,  in  Connecticut.  In  Massachusetts, 
however,  associations  from  this  time  became  gene- 
ral,* but  have  neither  held  nor  claimed  any  eccle- 
siastical authority,  such  as  was  designed  in  the 
"Proposals,"  with  the  single  exception  of  examin- 
ing and  licensing  candidates.  Two  attempts  have 
since  been  made  to  give  ecclesiastical  authority  to 
ministerial  associations ;  but  they  have  been  signal 
failures.  John  Cotton,  in  his  Book  of  the  Keys, 
alludes  to  the  desirableness  of  such  associations ; 
and  Goodwin  and  Nye,  in  their  dedicatory  epistle 
to  that  book,^  speak  of  his  asserting  the  necessity 
of  so  guarding  them  that  they  shall  not  "  intrench 
or  impair  the  privilege  of  entire  jurisdiction  com- 
mitted to  each  congregation."  Mitchell  ^  says :  "  It 
is  the  province  of  associations  to  license  candidates 
for  the  ministry,"  which  is  true  in  practice ;  "  but 
from  the  beginning  it  was  not  so."  I  am  informed 
that  the  American  Baptist  and  English  Indepen- 
dent churches  all  stand  fast  in  their  liberty  on  this 
point. 

Eliot,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Massachu- 
setts,* informs  us  that  Roger  Williams  and  others 
opposed  ministers'  meetings,  lest  it  should  grow  to 

*  Punchard,  View,  196,  quotes  Cotton  Mather,  Rat.  Dis.  179 — 
181,  affirming  that  the  proposals  for  associations  had  not  been 
universally  complied  withal  in  1726.  Upham,  Rat.  Dis.  153, 
shows  from  the  Magnalia,  that  they,  however,  began  to  be  formed 
as  early  as  1690. 
3« 


30  AUTHORITY. 

presbytery;  but  this  fear  was  without  foundation, 
as  they  were  all  clear  on  this  one  point,  that  no 
church  or  person  can  have  power  over  another 
church.^  The  Answer  to  the  Hampshire  Narrative 
asserts  that  "^  associations  are  not  so  much  as  named 
in  the  Platform :  it  is  free  and  voluntary  how  far 
people  will  refer  to  them  for  advice.  It  expresses 
hope  *  that  "  a  new  contention  will  not  arise  about 
the  rights  of  associations  and  the  liberty  of  the 
churches  in  calling  and  ordaining  pastors.'^  The 
association  had  interposed  in  a  case  in  Springfield, 
and  the  civil  authority  had  a  warrant  for  arresting 
part  of  the  council,  assembled  against  the  wishes 
of  the  association.  And  they  actually  did  imprison 
the  candidate  for  an  alleged  breach  of  the  peace 
in  the  matter.^  The  council  ^^  blame  the  association 
for  setting  up  authority  over  the  church  in  Spring- 
field. Their  answer  was  imputed  to  the  pen  of  the 
Rev.  William  Cooper,  of  Brattle-street  Church,  Bos- 
ton." —  See  Approbation,  License. 

^  See  them  in  Wise's  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Espoused,  77 — 
80.  *  See  Consociation.  ^  Page  7.  "*  Page  232.  *  In  Mass.  Hist. 
Soc.  Col.  X.  16.  ®  See  the  same  corroborated  in  Eliot's  Biog.  Diet. 
434,  art.  Skelton.  '  Page  5.  »  Page  55.  »  Pages  79—82. 
^0  Page  77.     ^'  Eliot's  Biog.  Diet.  129,* 

AUTHORITY,  human,  renounced.  —  Robinson,  in 
his  answer  to  Bernard,*  is  very  positive  on  this  point. 

*  The  author  has  been  requested  to  give  an  article  on  the 
tenure  of  the  connection  of  members  with  their  associations. 
Finding  nothing  on  the  subject,  he  can  report  nothing,  save  the 
obvious  principle,  that,  in  such  a  case,  the  tenure  is  limited  to  a 
strict  construction  of  the  given  associational  constitution. 


BAPTISM.  31 

"  Not  to  prove  and  try  what  is  offered  to  the  con- 
trary of  any  man's  judgment,  in  the  balance  of  the 
sanctuary,  is  to  honor  men  above  God,  and  advance 
a  throne  above  the  throne  of  Christ."  J.  Cook ' 
thinks  that  "  nothing  more  hinders  reformation  than 
taking  things  upon  trust,  not  supporting  authority 
by  solid  reasoning;  as  if  an  argument  from  autho- 
rity were  any  proof  to  a  wise  man."  In  Foxcroft's 
Century  Sermon,^  it  is  asserted  that  "  there  was,  in 
the  infancy  of  the  Reformation,  a  set  of  men  who 
appealed  to  the  law  and  to  the  testimony;  re- 
nounced all  implicit  credit  to  human  teachers,  and 
all  human  imposition  in  divine  worship.  One  hun- 
dred of  these  pleaded  their  separation  before  the 
Lord  Mayor  and  Bishop  Sands,  and  fourteen  or 
fifteen  of  them  were  imprisoned  in  1557."  —  See 
Watts's  Hymns,  b.  ii.  hymn  149,  stanza  5.  Scrip- 
tures a  sufficient  guide  to  order. 

»  In  Han.  i.  208  ;  and  Works,  ii.  52.  =  What  the  Independents 
would  Have,  in  Han.  iii.  259.     '  Page  8. 

BAPTISM,  proper  subjects  of.  —  Visible  believers 
and  their  households  have  always  been  held  by 
Congregationalists  proper,  to  be  proper  subjects  of 
this  ordinance.  The  early  and  most  of  the  late 
Congregationalists  hold  these  the  only  proper  sub- 
jects of  it.  John  Robinson  says : ^  "It  doth  no 
more  belong  to  the  seed  of  godless  parents  than 
doth  the  comfo-rt  flowing  from  the  righteousness  of 
faith  unto  the  parents  themselves."  His  defence 
of  infant-baptism  is  condensed  from  his  answer  to 
Helwisse  in  Punchard's  History  of  Congregational- 


82  BAPTISM. 

ism.''  Ainsworth  maintained  the  same :  his  views 
may  be  seen  at  length  in  Hanbury.'  The  elders  of 
the  New  England  churches,  in  their  Answer  to  the 
Nine  Positions,'*  quote  John  Alasco :  "  None  ought 
to  be  driven  back  who  is  a  member  of  the  chm'ch, 
nor  admitted  to  baptism  who  is  not  a  member.  .  .  . 
We  do  baptize  their  infants  alone  who  have  joined 
themselves  to  our  churches."  John  Cotton  argues :  * 
"  If  one  of  the  parents  cannot  claim  a  right  to  the 
communion,  they  cannot  claim  baptism  for  their 
children."  He  maintains  ^  that  it  can  only  be  on 
account  of  the  next  parent  or  pro-parent,  otherwise 
it  may  be  extended  even  to  Turks  and  infidels. 
Cotton  afterwards  changed  his  mind  on  some 
points  relative  to  the  subjects  of  baptism ;  and 
what  is  claimed  to  be  his  retraction  is  bound  with 
a  copy  of  his  treatise  on  the  Holiness  of  Church 
Members,  in  the  Antiquarian  Library,  Worcester; 
but,  instead  of  advocating  the  half-way  covenant, 
he  seems  only  to  retract  a  former  opinion,  that  be- 
ing in  covenant  was  unnecessary  to  communion 
in  either  seal.  This  point  seems  to  have  been  one 
of  those  which  led  to  the  separation  of  the  New 
England  Puritans  from  the  English  church ;  and 
"  Mr.  Davenport  left  Amsterdam  because  he  could 
not  conscientiously  baptize  all  sorts  of  infants."  ^ 
He  had  a  controversy  with  the  Dutch  divines,  and 
also  in  New  England,  whether  the  children  of  com- 
municants only  should  be  admitted  to  the  ordi- 
nance.^ Isaac  Chauncy  ^  says :  "  No  non-member 
can  plead  right  to  any  seal,  the  seals  being  given  to 
the  church."    The  Apology  of  the  (3verseers,  Elders, 


BAPTISM.  83 

and  Deacons  of  tlie  English  Church  at  Amsterdam 
maintains^'*  that  baptism  is  only  for  the  faithful 
and  their  seed,  or  those  under  their  government. 
The  Principles  of  the  Robinson  Church  assert  *^ 
that  baptism  is  only  for  visible  believers  and  their 
unadult  children.  Increase  Mather  maintains  ^^ 
that  adopted  children  of  believers  may  be  baptized, 
and  shows  that  Ames  and  Cotton  taus^ht  the  same. 
Dwight^^  argues,  at  length,  for  confining  it  to  the 
households  of  believers,  from  the  constitution  of 
the  Abrahamic  church ;  from  Matt.  xix.  13,  14, 
Acts  XX.  38,  39,  and  1  Cor.  vii.  14 ;  from  the  Scrip- 
tures not  presenting  two  sets  of  qualification ;  from 
the  tenor  of  the  Christian  covenant  precluding  it; 
and  the  presumption  that  it  would  introduce  dis- 
order into  the  Christian  church  to  admit  it.  The 
adverse  principles  seem  to  have  begun  to  prevail 
in  New  England  about  1660,  though  a  foundation 
for  them  had  previously  been  laid.  In  the  Answer 
of  the  Elders  and  Messengers  to  the  General  Court 
in  Boston  in  1662,  they  argue  largely  in  favor  of 
receiving  the  children  of  those  who  were  baptized 
in  infancy  and  own  the  covenant.^*  Dr.  Increase 
Mather  at  first  opposed  the  doctrine  of  this  synod, 
but  soon  changed  his  mind,  and  published  "the 
First  Principles  of  New  England  concerning  Bap- 
tism," in  which  he  declares  that  the  half-way  cove- 
nant was  the  doctrine  of  the  first  fathers  of  New 
England,^^  and  claims  ^^  John  Cotton  as  on  that. 
side  of  the  question.  But  the  argument  was  either 
overstrained  through  the  testimony  of  posthumous 
letters,  or  else   Cotton's   opponents  justly  charged 


34  BAPTISM. 

him  with  contradicting  himself/^  'He  did,  however, 
maintain  that  the  children  of  those  not  in  covenant 
might  be  baptized,  provided  the  parents  would 
resign  their  education  to  responsible  church  mem- 
bers, as  grandparents,  &lc.  This  proviso,  however.^ 
destroys  by  implication  the  right  of  those  not  con- 
forming to  it.  His  doctrines  on  this  point  amount 
to  little  else  than  that  of  the  admitted  right  of  bap- 
tism to  the  adopted  children  of  believing  house- 
holders. 

Among  the  noted  defenders  of  confining  bap- 
tism to  the  households  of  believers  was  President 
Chauncy,  who  wrote  his  famous  Antisynodalia  for 
this  purpose,  in  which  be  takes  this  ground  :^^ 
"  Visible  believers,  and  converts  in  full  communion, 
in  an  instituted  church  (being  unbaptized),  together 
with  their  next  seed  in  minority^  are  the  proper  sub- 
jects of  baptism."  *  These  are  an  account  only  of 
disputes  about  the  extent  of  the  ordinance,  while 
the  writings  of  those  who  agi*ee  on  the  validity  of 
infant-baptism  are  too  numerous  to  admit  even  a 
synopsis  in  this  work.  Dwight^''  and  Emmons^** 
have  given  us  their  views  at  large  on  the  general 
subject.  Robinson  says  :  ^^  "  We  require  of  them 
(iVnabaptists)  proof  how  the  grace  of  God  is  so 
straitened  by  Christ's  coming  in  the  flesh  as  to 
cast  out  of  the  church  the  greatest  part  of  the 
church  before,  —  the  infants  of  believers." — See 
Half-way  Covenant. 


*  Enough  to  vindicate  him  from  the  charge  of  antipedobaptist 
Bentiments,  though  he  held  to  immersion. 


BAPTISM.  85 

>  Apology,  in  Han.  i.  375  ;  and  Works,  iii.  19.  *  Pages  342,  343. 
»  Vol.  i.  152,  408—416.  *  Page  71.  *  Way,  81.  «  lb.  87,  88. 
7  Trumbull's  Hist,  of  Conn.  i.  492,  and  Han.  i.  526—546  «  Eliot, 
Biog  Diet.  149.  '  Divine  Institution  of  Cong.  Churches,  Preface 
ix.  *"  Page  71.  '*  In  Prince's  Chronology,  91.  *^  First  Princi- 
ples of  New  England  concerning  Baptism.  ^^  Works,  Serm.  clix. 
"  Prop.  V.  97—108.  »^  Page  1.  '«  Pages  2,  5.  "  See  Han.  ii. 
560—583.  "  Page  16.  ^^  Vol.  v.  Serm.  clvii.— clix.  »°  Vol.  v. 
482—500.    ^'  Ans.  to  Helwisse,  in  Han.  i.  270. 

Another  question  closely  connected  with  the  fore- 
going is  —  Does 


BAPTISM  admit  the  baptized  to  the  churches  ?  — 
The  advocates  for  national  establishments,  and  also 
the  abettors  of  the  half-way  covenant,  of  course, 
maintain  the  affirmative  ;  while  the  separating 
Congregational  Puritans  advocate  the  negative, 
and  the  Baptists  many  of  them  advocate  the  affir- 
mative, seemingly  on  the  principle  that  extremes 
meet.  Some  of  the  early  Congregational  lights 
wrote  with  great  clearness  to  prove  their  position. 
John  Robinson  says,^  "  The  church  was  not  given 
to  baptism,  but  baptism  to  the  church;"  and  ar- 
gues, that,  if  admission  to  the  church  be  by  baptism, 
then  casting  out  of  the  church  must  be  unbap1;izing. 
The  same  doctrine  is  taught  in  Hooker's  Survey,^ 
Richard  Mather's  Church  Government  and  Church 
Covenant,^  J.  Owen's  Answer  to  the  Review  of  the 
Nature  of  Schism.'^  John  Robinson  *  inquires  to 
what  church  Helwisse,  Smith,  and  others  were  ad- 
mitted. They  rebaptized  themselves.  The  same 
question  will  apply  to  Roger  Williams  and  the 
American  Baptists.     Prof.  Knowles^  attempts  to 


86  BAPTISM. 

avoid  the  dilemma,  by  assuming  that  a  voluntary 
agreement  makes  a  church ;  and  then  they  may 
ordain  a  minister,  and  he  may  baptize  the  members. 
This  is  true  Congregational  doctrine  ;  but  how  does 
it  comport  with  the  Baptist  doctrine,  that  baptism 
is  indispensable  to  church  membership  ? 

*  Ans.  to  Helwisse,  in  Han.  i.  266,  267 ;  and  Works,  iii.  167. 
'■^  Part  i.  55.  ^  Pages  12—21.  *  In  Han.  iii.  460.  °  Ans.  to  Hel- 
■wisse,  in  Han.  i.  267  ;  and  Works,  iii.  168.  ^  Life  of  Roger  Wil- 
liams, 16S. 

BAPTISM,  does  it  make  iyifants  members  ? —  This 
question  is  so  blended  with  the  foregoing,  that  the 
same  persons,  if  Congregationalists,  must,  to  be 
consistent,  maintain  either  the  affirmative  or  the 
negative  of  both.  Richard  Mather  ^  approvingly 
quotes  Zepperus  and  Parker,  showing  that  they 
were  not  received  as  members  till  they  made  a 
profession  of  their  own  faith.  Higginson  and 
Brewster  agreed  to  the  same  doctrine.*  Cambridge 
Platform  takes  the  same  ground.^  J.  Owen  '^  shows 
how,  though  no  members,  they  are  still,  by  cove- 
nant with  the  parents,  under  the  watch  and  care  of 
the  church ;  a  very  important  distinction  and  doc- 
trine. Cotton  Mather  *  quotes  Flavel  as  maintain- 
ing, that  the  fierce  disputes  about  infant-baptism 
are  punishments  for  neglecting  our  duty  to  the 
baptized. 

Lord  King,  on  the  other  hand,  says : ^  "In  gene- 
ral, all  those  that  were  baptized  were  looked  upon 
as  members  of  the  church,  and  had  a  right  to  all 
the  privileges  thereof."  He  then  excepts  those  who 
were  guilty  of  gross,  scandalous  sins.     The  Answer 


BAPTISM,  37 

of  the  Boston  Synod  of  1662  ^  maintains  their 
membership,  so  as  to  claim  membership  for  their 
households,  though  not  to  full  communion  without 
public  personal  profession.  The  Gospel  Order  Re- 
vived, in  answer  to  Dr.  I.  Mather,  says :  ^  "  For  he 
(Dr.  M.)  has  taught  us  that  adult  baptized  persons 
are  of  the  church."  In  Dr.  Mather's  own  copy  of 
that  work  (in  the  Antiquarian  Library,  Worcester)  is 
written  in  the  margin  against  this  sentence,  '-^falseP 
It  is  in  the  doctor's  own  handwriting.  Shepard,  in 
his  Church  Membership  of  Children,  adduces  all  the 
usual  arguments  in  favor  of  their  membership.  Dr. 
Dwight^  maintains  that  they  are  members  of  the 
church  general,  in  the  same  sense  that  the  eunuch 
was  a  member.  He  gives  his  opinion,^°  that  such 
persons  cannot  be  excommunicated;  that,  during 
their  minority,  their  discipline  is  committed  wholly 
to  their  parents  and  guardians ;  that  the  church 
thus  possesses  an  indirect  control  over  them ;  and 
that  they  are  bound  to  reprove  and  admonish  bap- 
tized persons,  whom  they  see  in  the  commission  of 
sin. 

»  Apology,  34,  35.  ^  Han.  ii.  166.  ^  Chap.  xii.  sect.  7.  *  Ori- 
ginal of  Churches,  chap.  iv.  in  "Works,  xx.  188.  *  Magnalia,  ii. 
459.  « Enquiry,  part  i.  100.  'Pages  72—108.  » Page  19. 
•  Serm.  clvii.     *°  lb.  Serm.  clxii. 

BAPTISM,  is  it  indispensable  to  communion?  — 
Robert  Hall,  a  Baptist,^  has  cogently  argued  that 
it  is  not  per  se  indispensable,  because  the  first 
communicants  had  not  received  Christian  baptism  ; 
and  the  evidence  preponderates,  that  others,  as 
Apollos,  had  communed  previously  to  receiving  it. 
4 


38  BAPTISM. 

From  various  other  considerations,  he  also  demon- 
strates the  same  point.  The  Encyclopedia  of  Re- 
ligious Knowledge'*  gives  the  arguments  of  Mr. 
J.  D.  Fuller,  on  the  other  side,  which  may  be  thus 
epitomized :  The  difference  in  the  baptisms  prac- 
tised before  and  after  Christ's  death  were  circum- 
stantial, and  not  essential.  The  commission  in 
Matt,  xxviii.  makes  baptism  as  essential  to  commu- 
nion as  faith  to  baptism.  The  apostles  uniformly 
baptized  converts  previously  to  their  admission. 
Conformity  to  the  commission  thus  explained  is 
not  schism^  but  promotive  of  Christian  union.  The 
mutual  forbearance  required  does  not  involve  the 
surrender  of  Christian  institutions.  It  is  not  incon- 
sistency, but  charity,  to  unite  with  Pedobaptists  in 
acts  not  implying  the  abandonment  of  the  com- 
mission. It  is  better  to  suffer  imputations  of  un- 
charitableness  than  to  sin  by  abandoning  Christ's 
commission.  —  See  Communion,  Terms  of ;  Bap- 
tism, does  it  admit  the  baptized  to  churches  ?  * 

»  Works,  i.  292—351 ;  ii.  202—230.     *  Page  396. 

BAPTISM,  may  it  be  administered  without  a 
church? —  The  affirmative  of  this  question  is  main- 
tained by  Goodwin^  on  the  ground  of  the  case 
of  the  Ethiopian  eunuch ;  of  John  the  Baptist,  re- 
quiring only  faith  and  repentance ;  of  Peter,  at  the 
Pentecost;  and  of  the  jailer  and  his  household. 
Owen  maintains*  that  professing  believers  and  their 
households  have  a  right  to  baptism,  whether  they 

*  A  large  portion  of  the  Congregationalists  now  hold  baptism 
to  be  indispensable  to  communion. 


BAPTISM.  39 

are  joined  to  any  particular  church  or  not.  John 
Cotton,  on  the  contrary,  did  not  baptize  his  child 
at  sea,  because  he  believed  that  it  should  be  done 
in  a  church,  and  that  a  minister  could  not  give  the 
seal  but  in  his  own  congregation.^  This  was  also 
the  long-received  doctrine  in  the  New  England 
churches,  and  precluded  baptisms  out  of  the  church. 
—  See  Ministers,  may  they  administer  seals,  ^c.  ? 

»  Ch.  Gov.  233,  377,  378.  ^  Review  of  Nature  of  Schism,  in 
Han.  iii.  460.  ^  Winthrop's  Journal,  i.  110;  New  Englander  for 
August,  1850,  p.  410. 

BA.PTISM  should  be  public.  —  Dr.  Sparke  and 
Mr.  Travers,  in  their  conference  with  Archbishop 
Whitgift,^  object  to  three  things  in  the  practice  of 
baptism  in  the  English  Episcopal  church :  Its  be- 
ing done  in  private;  being  done  by  laymen  and 
women ;  and  being  held  necessary  to  salvation. 
Cotton  Mather^  offers  reasons  to  show  why  the 
New  England  churches  did  not  practise  private 
baptism  ;  one  of  which  is,  "  that,  as  the  church  owe 
special  duties  to  the  baptized,  they  think  it  reasona- 
ble that  they  should  see  the  baptism."  Increase 
Mather,  in  his  Order  of  the  Gospel  Professed  and 
Practised  in  the  New  England  Churches,  shows  ^ 
that  they  disallowed  of  private  baptisms.  Upham  * 
says  that  they  are 'commonly,  but  not  necessarily, 
performed  before  the  whole  congregation ;  some- 
times in  those  meetings  which  are  open  only  to 
church  members ;  and  sometimes,  when  there  is 
urgent  and  satisfactory  reason,  in  private  houses. 

»  In  Neal,  Hist.  Pur.  i.  166.  «  Rat.  Dis.  72—74.  '  Page  62. 
*  Rat.  Dis.  218. 


40  BAPTISM. 

BAPTISM,  wlio  can  administer  valid  ?  —  Lord 
King  says/  that  in  the  primitive  churci>es  it  was 
usually  performed  by  "bishops  and  pastors;"  and 
that  it  was  permitted  to  "  presbyters  and  deacons, 
and,  in  cases  of  necessity,  even  to  laymen,  to  bap- 
tize." Thomas  Goodwin  ^  maintains,  that  a  minis- 
ter, who  is  not  a  pastor,  may  administer  it.  This 
was  long  controverted  by  many  of  the  old  Congre- 
gationalists.  (See  Ministers,  may  they  administer 
seals  in  a  church  of  which  they  are  not  pastors  ?) 
This  is,  I  believe,  now  universally  admitted,  and 
has  been  since  the  synod  of  1648,  which  virtually 
admitted  it  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  Platform. 
There  is  a  manuscript  letter  of  Cotton  Mather  in 
the  Antiquarian  Library  in  Worcester,  which  cites 
a  case  where  baptism  administered  by  an  Anabap- 
tist deacon  was  held  to  be  valid.  By  this  it  is  not 
meant  that  it  is  in  order  for  others  than  ministers 
to  baptize.  The  New  England  elders  say,^  that  the 
administration  of  the  seals  is  given  to  ministers,  as 
the  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  God.  John  Ro- 
binson says,*  that  baptism,  "  by  an  unlawful  minis- 
ter, of  an  unfit  subject,  and  in  an  un sanctified 
communion  and  unlawful  manner,  is  true  baptism, 
unlawfully  and  falsely  administered."  This  he  illus- 
trates by  the  case  of  a  profane  oath,  which  binds 
him  who  takes  it.  The  Genevan  disputants  say :  ^ 
"  The  force  of  the  sacraments  doth  in  nowise  de- 
pend on  the  person  of  the  minister  who  delivereth 
them,  but  upon  the  ordinance  of  God,  only  so  that 
the  same  be  observed  by  a  public  person,  rightly 
called,  or  at  least  exercising  a  public  function  by  a 


BAPTISM.  41 

common  error.  .  .  .  The  Donatists,  therefore,  and 
such  like,  did  err,  who  taught  that  the  sacraments, 
administered  by  evil  ministers,  were  of  no  force." 
"  Neither*  did  those  spots  (papal additions), though 
filthy  and  loathsome,  annihilate  baptism."  This 
is  argued  at  length  by  Anthony  Thysius,  "  a  Low- 
country  man." 

*  Enquiry,  part  ii.  44.  *  Ch.  Gov.  377,  378.  ^  Answer  to  Nine 
Positions,  67.  *  In  Han.  i.  269 ;  and  Works,  iii.  186.  *  Page  165. 
•  Page  174. 

Here  arises  another  question,  viz. 

BAPTISM,  is  popish,  valid  ?  —  This  seems  to 
have  been  admitted  by  all  the  early  Congregation- 
alists.^  Francis  Johnson  maintains  the  affirmative 
on  this  question,'^  because,  where  God  requireth  his 
people  to  come  out  of  Babylon,  "  he  doth  not  re- 
quire them  to  leave  whatsoever  is  there  had,  but 
requireth  them  to  have  no  more  communion  with 
her  sins."  Henry  Johnson  argues  ^  that  the  church 
of  Rome  must  be  a  true  church  to  render  her 
baptism  valid.  This  is  the  doctrine  of  rigid  Sepa- 
ratists. 

^  Han.  i.  310,  311.  '  Treatise  against  Two  Errors  of  the  Ana- 
baptists, in  Han.  i.  169.    ^  jb.  320—324. 

BAPTISM,  mode  o/ .^  —  Sprinkling  has  always 
been  considered  by  Congregationalists  as  a  valid 
mode  of  baptism.  So  says  Cotton  Mather  in  his 
Ratio  Disciplinae.*     He  gives  a  description  of  the 

ancient  manner  of  baptizing,*  which  is  the  same  as 

4* 


42         »  BISHOPS. 

that  now  m  general  use.  Dwight'  maintains  that 
it  may  be  administered  indifferently,  either  by 
sprinkling,  affusion,  or  immersion.  Emmons  ^  main- 
tains the  propriety  of  sprinkling  or  pouring,  but 
admits  the  validity  of  immersion.  In  Ware's  His- 
tory of  the  Old  North  and  New  Brick  Churches, 
Boston,*  there  is  a  record  of  the  baptism  of  a  child 
by  immersion,  in  1781,  at  the  particular  request 
of  its  mother. 

»  Page  79.  ^  lb.  75.  '  Vol.  v.  330—342.  *  Vol.  v.  473—482. 
*  Page  59.  Much  succinct  information  on  the  several  points  con- 
nected with  the  subject  of  Baptism  may  be  found  in  Upham's 
Katio  Disciplinse,  212—224. 

I 

BENEDICTION.  —  Coleman,  in  his  Primitive 
Church,^  shows  at  length  that  there  is  a  great  deal 
of  superstitious  reverence  for  a  sacerdotal  benedic- 
tion, growing  out  of  the  error  of  a  vicarious  priest- 
hood in  the  Christian  church.  He  maintains^  that 
it  properly  means  no  more  than  a  benevolent  wish 
and  an  appropriate  prayer  for  a  blessing  on  the 
people.  He  asserts  ^  that  there  are  no  traces  of  its 
having  been  used  in  the  primitive  churches  during 
the  first  and  second  centuries. 

1  Chap.  xiv.  pp.  412—426.    *  lb.  416* 

BISHOPS,  same  as  presbyters,  —  Wickliffe  is  bold 
to  assert  that  they  were  the  same  in  the  apostolic 
age.^  ^rius  had  maintained  the  same  doctrine 
several  centuries  before  him..^  The  same  was  main- 
tained even  by  the  reforming  Puritan  Episcopa- 
lians ; '  and  even  the  then  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 


BISHOPS.  4B 

asserted  *  that  bishops  and  priests  were  but  one 
office  in  the  beginning  of  Christ's  religion.  See  the 
isame  doctrine  advocated  by  Lord  Brooke,*  Thomas 
Hooker,^  and  Cotton  Mather."^  See  also  Neander, 
Church  History,  i.  106.  Gibbon,  in  his  Decline 
and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,^  calls  them  "two 
appellations,  which  in  their  first  origin  seem  to 
have  distinguished  the  same  office  and  the  same 
order  of  persons."  Dwight  discusses  the  subject  at 
length.^  See  Answer  of  the  Divines  to  his  Ma- 
jesty's Reasons  why  he  cannot  abolish  Episcopal 
Government,  3 — 8 ;  and  their  Answer  to  his  Ma- 
jesty's Second  Paper,  1 — 38. 

^  Puncliard,  Hist.  162;  and  Neal,  Pur,  i.  29,  note.  'Pun- 
chard,  Hist.  75,  78.  3  lb.  195,  196.  •»  lb.  198.  *  In  Han.  ii.  118. 
«  Survey,  Part  ii.  22,  33.     '  Rat.  Dis.  200—207.     "  In  Han.  i.  7. 

^  Serm.  cl.  cli. 

"BISHOPS,  diocesan^  not  jure  divino,  —  This  was 
long  ago  maintained  by  even  Bellarmine.*  Lord 
Brooke^  maintained  the  same  in  the  discourse 
cited  in  the  last  article.  And  John  Owen  says :  ^ 
"  Sir  Edward  Coke  will  satisfy  any  in  the  rise  and 
fall  of  Episcopal  jurisdiction."  The  defence  of  M. 
Henry's  Inquiry  into  the  Nature  of  Schism  *  says  : 
"  The  word  of  God  nowhere  asserts  that  bishops 
are  a  superior  order  to  presbyters."  And,*  "  Though 
some  reformed  churches  admit  a  kind  of  Episco- 
pacy, yet  they  never  pretend  a  jus  divinum  for  it." 
Mr.  Baynes  ^  shows  that  Christ  and  his  apostles 
did  not  ordain  ordinary  ministers  with  power  over 
others.  Macaulay  says : '  "  The  founders  of  the 
Anglican  church  had  retained  Episcopacy  as  an 


44  BISHOPS. 

ancient,  a  decent,  and  a  convenient  ecclesiastical 
polity,  but  had  not  declared  that  form  of  church  go- 
vernment to  be  of  divine  institution.  In  the  reign 
of  Elizabeth,  Jewell,  Cooper,  and  Whitgift .  .  .  never 
denied  that  a  Christian  community  without  a  bishop 
might  be  a  pure  church." 

>  See  Goodwin's  Ch.  Gov.  67.  ^  Han.  ii.  118.  ^  in  ib.  iii.  442. 
*  Page  17.  ^  Page  32.  - «  Diocesan's  Trial,  24—77.  '  Hist.  Eng. 
i.  58,  59. 

BISHOPS  diocesan,  not  successors  of  the  apostles. 
—  This  follows,  of  course,  from  the  arguments  of 
the  last  article,  "  unless "  they  succeed  them,  as 
says  John  Robinson,*  "  as  darkness  succeeds  light." 
Burton  pertinently  answers  Prynne,  even  to  Pres- 
byterian claims  to  legislative  power :  ^  "  If  they  who 
pretend  to  succeed  the  apostles  will  challenge  the 
same  liberty  which  the  apostles  had,  they  must 
first  of  all  show  their  immediate  commission  from 
Christ."  —  See  Succession,  ministerial^  interrupted 
or  uninterrupted  ? 

1  In  Punchard,  Hist.  333  ;  and  Works,  ii.  436,  437.  ^  In  Han. 
ii.  400. 

BISHOPS  originally  had  the  care  of  hut  one 
church. —  So  Mosheim  in  Hanbury.*  Wise*  quotes 
Tertullian,  Irenseus,  Eusebius,  Justin  Martyr,  and 
Cyprian,  to  the  same  point.  Punchard,  in  his 
View,^  also  quotes  Mosheim :  "  A  bishop  had  charge 
of  a  single  church,  which  might  ordinarily  be  con- 
tained in  a  private  house.     Nor  was  he  its  head, 

BUT    WAS    IN    REALITY    ITS    MINISTER    AND    SERVANT." 


BKOWNISTS.  45 

He  had  no  power  to  ordain  or  determine  any  thing, 
except  with  the  concurrence  of  the  presbyters  and 
brotherhood. 

>  Vol.  i.  10.    *  Vindication,  10—12.    »  Page  144. 

BISHOPS  should  he  chosen  by  the  people.  —  Wise 
asserts  *  that  they  always  were  thus  chosen  in  the 
primitive  churches.  —  See  Pastor  chosen  by  the  peo- 
ple. Congregationalists  hold  pastor  and  bishop  to 
be  exactly  synonymous. 

*  Vindication,  13. 

BROWNISTS.  — I  introduce  this  article  to  in- 
quire how  far  they  differed  from  Congregation- 
alists. Punchard  says  :  ^  "It  is  evident,  that  in  its 
essential  features  it  (Brownism)  corresponded  with 
Congregationalism  as  established  in  New  Eng- 
land." Yet  the  early  Congregationalists  took 
great  pains  not  to  be  identified  with  the  followers 
of  Robert  Brown.  In  an  important  point  they 
obviously  differed.  The  Brownists  did  not  ac- 
knowledge the  churches  of  England  to  be  true 
churches,^  whereas  this  has  never  been  denied  by 
true  Congregationalists.  It  has  perhaps  been 
generally  supposed  that  the  Brownists  held  to  the 
utter  independency  of  the  churches ;  but  Punchard 
shows  ^  that  they  held  that  one  church  might  give 
advice,  counsel,  and  even  reproof,  to  another ;  and, 
if  need  be,  even  withdraw  fellowship  from  it,  which 
is  all  that  is  ever  claimed  either  by  English  Inde- 
pendents or  strict  American  Congregationalists. 
It   is    highly  probable   that  they  often   supposed 


46  BROWNISTS. 

themselves  to  differ  where  they  were  really  agreed, 
as  was  the  case  with  the  churches  in  Salem  and 
Plymouth,  who  afterwards  found  that  they  were 
one  in  sentiment. —  See  Agreement  o/"  Cow^re^a- 
tionalists. 

They,  however,  always  kept  aloof  fr»m  the  ex- 
clusive spirit  of  the  Brownists ;  and,  as  these  were 
proscribed,  no  one  wished  to  identify  himself  with 
them  further  than  his  own  conscience  required. 
Baillie  (who  wanted  a  Scots  army,  15,000  strong, 
to  promote  Presbyterianism)  speaks  of  Robinson'* 
as  "  the  most  learned,  polished,  and  modest  spirit 
which  that  sect  ever  enjoyed."  He  says :  "  It  would 
have  been  truly  a  marvel  if  such  a  man  had  gone 
to  the  end  a  rigid  Separatist.  But,  alas!  his  new 
doctrine,  though  it  was  destructive  to  his  old  sect, 
became  the  occasion  of  a  new  one,  not  very  good." 
Robinson's  sentiments  he  styles  Semi-separating 
Independency.  He  says :  "  No  Independent  will 
take  it  well  at  any  man's  hand  to  be  called  a 
Brownist."  Dr.  I.  Mather*  makes  the  distinction 
between  Brownists  and  Congregationalists  to  con- 
sist in  the  question,  whether  a  valid  church  act  can 
be  consummated  without  the  concurrence  of  both 
the  elders  and  the  brethren ;  but  whoever  is  much 
conversant  with  these  subjects  can  hardly  fail  to 
refer  this  assertion  to  special  pleading.  Paget  ^ 
says,  Brownists  are  of  three  kinds :  "  Some  sepa- 
rate from  the  church  of  England  for  corruptions, 
and  yet  confess  it  and  the  church  of  Rome  to  be  a 
true  church,  as  the  followers  of  Mr.  Johnson.  Some 
renounce  the  church  of  England,  and  yet  allow  of 


CATHOLICISM.  47 

private  communion  with  the  godly  therein,  as  Mr. 
Robinson.  Some  renouYice  all  communion  with 
that  church,  as  Mr.  Ainsworth."  —  See  Power, 
churchy  is  it  installed  in  ministry  or  brethren  ? 

^  Hist.  248.  '  I^eal,  Puritans,  1.  149.  '  Hist.  248.  *  Han.  iii. 
132.  ^  Disq.  Ecc.  Councils,  Preface,  iv.  '  Arrow  against  Sepa- 
ration, in  Han.  i.  325. 

CALLING  of  a  minister^  in  what  does  it  consist  ? 

—  Congregationalists  have  ever  held  that  it  con- 
sists, not  in  ordination,  by  the  imposition  of  hands, 
but  in  the  election  of  the  people ;  that  the  ordina- 
tion is  nothing  but  the  recognizing  of  the  election, 
and  not  the  substance  of  it.^  Hence  their  doctrine 
is,  that  it  is  the  lifting  up  of  the  hands  of  the  bre- 
thren,^ and  not  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the 
elders,  which  constitutes  the  essence  of  the  pastoral 
relation.  Isaac  Chauncy,'  after  speaking  of  an 
immediate  call,  as  of  the  apostles,  says  a  mediate 
call  is  that  which  Christ  makes  by  the  instrumen- 
tality of  a  church.  The  consummation  of  the  call 
is  made  by  the  free  acceptance  of  the  person  called. 

—  See  Pastor,  Ordination,  Imposition  of  Hands, 
Elders,  Minister,  callings  ivhat  ? 

^  E,.  Mather's  Ans.  to  Rutherford,  in  Han.  ii.  187  ;  Goodwin, 
Ch.  Gov.  195.  *  Greek  of  Acts  xiv.  23,  in  opposition  to  King 
James's  and  the  Bishops'  garbled  translation  of  the  passage.  ^  Di- 
vine Institution  of  Congregational  Churches,  64,  65. 

CATHOLICISM  of  Congregational  churches.  — 
A  very  prevalent  error  is  the  belief  that  the  early 
Congregationalists   were    very   exclusive    in    their 


48  CENSURES. 

religion.  One  of  the  dividing  points  between  them 
and  the  Brownists  was  the  question  of' fellowship- 
ping  the  English  and  Reformed  churches  (see 
Brownists).  This  was  also  one  of  then:  great 
points  of  controversy  with  Roger  W^Uiams.^  Cot- 
ton Mather '  quotes  the  words  of  "  a  worthy  man 
who  walked  in  our  way  :  '  I  will  be  one  with  every 
one  that  is  one  with  Christ.' " '  He  says  the  churches 
of  New  England  endeavor  to  make  their  ecclesiasti- 
cal state  a  visible  sermon  to  the  world  upon  the  re- 
quisites of  men's  being  received  into  heaven  at  the 
last.  Governor  Winslow  says  *  that  Mr.  Parker  and 
Mr.  Noyes  of  Newbury,  and  Mr.  Hubbard  of  Hing- 
ham,  were  for  Presbytery,  yet  were  never  molested ; 
Presbyterians  might  have  a  complete  Presbytery 
near  Ipswich  and  Newbury,  and  it  was  answered 
affirmatively  by  the  court  that  they  might  have  one. 
One  minister  denieth  the  baptism  of  infants,  and 
divers  of  his  congregation  are  fallen  in  with  him, 
and  the  government  only  moved  the  elders  to  try 
to  convince  and  reclaim  him.  —  See  Confessions 
OF  Faith,  Communion,  Creeds,  Separation,  Schism, 
Toleration. 

1  Winthrop,  i.  53.    =  Rat.  Dis.  37.    =*  lb.  142.    *  Nar.  in  Young's 
Chron.  of  the  Pilgrims,  402—405. 

CENSURES,  power  of^  in  the  church. —  The  Sa 
voy  Declaration  *  says :  "  Every  church  hath  power 
in  itself  to  exercise  and  execute  all  those  censures 
appointed  by  him  (Christ)  in  the  way  and  order 
prescribed  in  the  gospel."  —  See  Admonition,  Sus- 
pension,   Excommunication,    Appeals,    Churches 


CEREMONIES.  49 

subject  to  no  jurisdiction  out  of  themselves,  Conso- 
ciations, Jurisdiction,  Keys  ;  Power,  church. 
*  Inst,  of  Cong.  Churches,  art.  xviii.  in  Han.  iii.  547. 

CEREMONIES.  —  Bradshaw '  argues  strongly 
against  conformity  to  these,  for  instance  the  sign 
of  the  cross  in  baptism,  because  conforming  to 
them  is  not  keeping  ourselves  from  idols.  Robert 
Parker  wrote  a  volume  "  Against  Symbolizing  with 
Antichrist  in  Ceremonies,  especially  the  Cross  in 
Baptism."  He  powerfully  argues  that  a  host  of 
evils  grow  out  of  it.  Dr.  Osgood  ^  says  "  We  had 
no  consecrated  churches,  no  burial  or  matrimonial 
service ;  .  .  .  because  we  had  nothing  but  the  Bible, 
they  (Episcopalians)  were  confident  that  we  had 
no  religion."  Dr.  Ames,  in  his  "  Fresh  Suit  against 
Human  Ceremonies," '  asserts  that  "  the  Walden- 
ses  made  much  the  same  objections  to  human 
ceremonies  which  we  do."  He  quotes  one  of  their 
prominent  men :  "  All  customs  in  the  church,  which 
in  the  gospel  they  don't  read,  they  do  contemn ; 
they  affirm  that  those  things  which  are  appointed 
by  the  bishops  and  prelates  are  not  to  be  observed, 
because  they  are  the  tradition  of  men,  and  not  of 
God."  *  "  Even  the  inquisitor  Sylvester  says,  that 
to  interpret  human  precepts,  in  the  court  of  con- 
science, belongs  to  every  one  as  touching  his  own 
practice."  John  Howe  says  :  *  "  Stillingfleet  com- 
plains because  we  dare  not  consent  with  them  to 
the  additions  which  belong  not  to  religion.  While 
they  (Dissenters)  cannot  judge  the  ceremonies  law- 
ful, how  can  they  apprehend  themselves  bound  to 


50  CEREMONIES 

be  without  the  means  of  salvation  which  Christ's 
charter  entitles  them  to?"  Pierce,  in  his  Vindica- 
tion of  Dissenters,®  quotes  Wickliffe :  "  All  human 
traditions,  that  are  not  taught  in  the  gospel,  are 
superfluous  and  wicked."  He  shows  ^  that  the 
Bishop  of  St.  David's  inquired  in  the  Hampton 
Court  Conference  how  he  should  answer  certain 
objections  against  the  ceremonies,  as  the  sign  of 
the  cross ;  and  was  forbidden  to  reply  to  the  answer 
given  him.  He  shows  ^  that  the  church  has  no 
right  to  impose  kneeling  at  the  sacrament,  .  .  .  and 
then  refuse  it  to  those  that  will  not  conform.  Ames, 
in  his  Marrow  of  Sacred  Divinity,  says :  ^  "  No  wor- 
ship instituted  is  lawful,  unless  it  hath  God  for  the 
Author  and  Ordainer  of  it.  .  .  .  Of  like  kind  with 
images  are  all  those  ceremonies  which  are  ordained 
of  men  for  mystical  or  religious  signification."  One 
of  the  Genevan  Disputants  says :  ^°  "  Whosoever  do 
break  out  into  that  boldness,  that  either  they  do 
coin  new  sacraments,  or  add  unto  those  that  were 
appointed  of  the  Lord,  or  detract  any  tittle  from 
them,  they  are  guilty  of  treason  against  the  Majesty 
of  the  Highest."  Another  of  them  says :  ^*  "  It  is 
not  lawful  for  an  angel  in  heaven  to  ordain  any 
new  sacramental  rites."  Hence  he  condemns  the 
"  curious  additions "  to  the  sacrament  of  baptism. 
—  See  Habits,  Kneeling,  AuTHORiTY^wmaw,  In- 

DIFFERENTS,     IdOLATRY,     LiBERTY     OF     CONSCIENCE, 

Non-conformists,  Prayer  prescribed^  Schism,  Se- 
paration, Uniformity. 

*  Treatise  on  Worship  and  Ordinances,  98 — 116.     '  Dudlean 
Lect.  30.    TageS.    *  lb.  79.    *  Works,  170, 171.    «  Pages  4— 6. 


CHRISTMAS.  61 

»Ib.  158— 163.   « lb.  490.   »  Pages  271,  274.    "  Page  162.    "Page 
173. 


CHAPLAINS.  —  "  Private  chaplains,  to  minister 
to  families  or  neighborhoods  in  time  of  divine  ser- 
vice of  the  churches  where  they  dwell,  is  considered 
disorderly."  ^  "  Though  the  communicants  in  the 
churches  of  New  England  are  not  constantly  tied 
to  their  own  pastors,  yet,  if  they  should  not  ordina- 
rily hear  them  when  they  are  able  to  do  it,  the 
omission  w^ould  be  thought  a  disorder."  ^  John 
Milton  says :  ^  "  Scripture  knows  no  chaplains ;  and, 
the  church  not  owning  them,  they  are  left  to  the 
fate  of  the  sons  of  Sceva  the  Jew.  .  .  .  Public  prayer 
did  not  pertain  only  to  the  office  of  a  priest :  David, 
Solomon,  and  Jehoshaphat  might  pray  in  public, 
even  in  the  temple,  while  the  priest  stood  and  heard. 
.  .  .  What  ailed  the  king  that  he  could  not  chew 
his  own  matins  without  the  priest's  ore  tenus  ?  " 

»  C.  Mather,  Rat.  Dis.  62.    ^  ib.    3  Eikonoklastes,  163,  167. 

CHRISTIANS,  the  weakest^  to  be  received  to  the 

churches.  — "  It  is  not  eminency  of  holiness  that 

we  look  to  in  the  entertainment  of  members,  but 

uprightness  of  the  heart."  *  —  See  Members,  chiirclu 

*  Hooker's  Survey,  part  i.  23. 

CHRISTMAS.  —  This,  with  other  holy  days,  is 
rejected  by  Congregationalists,  on  the  ground  that 
they  are  enjoined  on  no  higher  authority  than  that 
of  men.  Indeed,  they  do  not  see  cause  to  believe 
that  it  is  appointed  on  the  true  anniversary  of  the 


52  CHURCH. 

birthday  of  our  Saviour.*  —  See  Holy  Days,  Cere- 
monies, Idolatry,  Authority  human. 

*  Ainsworth's  Arrow  Against  Idolatry,  in  Han.  i.  237. 

CHURCH,  what  constitutes  .one  ?  —  It  was  the 
united  opinion  of  the  early  Congregationalists,  that 
any  number  of  persons,  united  together  by  a  cove- 
nant either  expressed  or  implied,  for  the  worship  of 
God,  constitute  a  church.  John  Robinson  says :  * 
"  And  for  the  gathering  of  a  church  I  do  tell  you, 
that  in  what  place  soever,  whether  by  preaching  the 
gospel  by  a  true  minister,  by  a  false  minister,  by  no 
minister,  or  by  reading  and  conference,  or  by  any 
other  means  of  publishing  it,  two  or  three  faithful 
people  do  arise,  separating  themselves  from  the 
world  into  the  fellowship  of  the  gospel,  they  are  a 
church  truly  gathered,  though  never  so  weak."  In 
his  Apology  ^  he  defines  a  church  to  be  a  company 
of  faithful,  holy  people,  with  their  seed,  called  by 
the  word  of  God  into  a  public  covenant  with  Christ, 
and  among  themselves,  for  mutual  fellowship,  in 
the  use  of  all  the  means  of  God's  glory  and  their 
salvation.  Burton*  says:  ^^  Ekklesia,  the  church, 
is  properly  a  congregation  of  believers  called  out 
from  the  rest  of  the  world ;  for  so  saith  the  Lord, 
2  Cor.  vi.  17."  The  Saint's  Apology  says,'*  this  con- 
sent or  agreement  ought  to  be  explicit,  for  the  well- 
being,  but  not  necessarily  for  the  being,  of  a  true 
church  ;  for  it  may  be  implied  by  frequent  acts  of 
communion,  &c.  Dr.  Ames  says :  *  "  The  first 
thing  that  doth  make  actually  a  church  is  calling ; 
whence  also  it  hath  taken  both  its  name  and  defi- 


CHURCH.  53 

nition."  Jacob's  Church  Confession  says :  ^  "  They 
(the  English  congregations)  are  a  true  political 
church,  as  they  are  a  company  of  visible  Christians, 
united,  by  their  own  consent,  to  serve  God ;  .  .  . 
therefore  we  commune  with  them  upon  occasion." 
Euring  says  :^  "  Search  the  Scriptures,  and  you  shall 
find  that  every  true  visible  church  of  Christ  must 
consist  of  a  company  of  people  separated  from  the 
froward  generation  of  the  world  by  the  gospel,  and 
joined  or  built  together  into  a  holy  communion 
and  fellowship  among  themselves."  The  voluntary 
covenant,  either  expressed  or  implied,  our  fathers 
considered  a  sine  qua  non  to  a  regular  church 
organization.  They  therefore  rejected  the  ideas  of 
a  national  church,  and  of  the  full  communion  of 
those  not  in  voluntary  personal  covenant.^ 

In  Burton's  Modest  Answer  to  Prynne's  Full 
Reply  in  1645,  it  is  shown  ^  that  a  mere  implicit 
covenant  is  sufficient  to  the  being,  though  not  to 
the  well-being,  of  a  church.  Thomas  Goodwin 
argues,*°  that  a  church  must  be  composed  of  those 
who  not  only  make  confession,  as  Peter  did,  but 
are  united  together  for  divine  worship,  ordinances, 
and  church  government ;  and  "  that  it  is  "  a  holy 
nation,  ...  a  household  of  faith,  ...  a  holy  tem- 
ple," and  thus  is  an  organized  body ;  and  ^^  that  it 
is  an  instituted  body,  assembling  in  one  place,  built 
by  a  special  covenant.  In  his  Catechism*^  he  shows 
that  the  ancient  converts  joined  themselves  to  the 
church,  and  that  a  covenant  is  implied  in  their 
authority  to  judge  and  discipline  their  members, 

as  they  have  no  power  to  "judge  them  that  are 

5^ 


54  '  CHURCH. 

without."  Bradshaw  says  :  ^*  "They  hold  and 
maintain,  that  every  congregation  or  assembly  of 
men,  ordinarily  joined  together  in  the  true  worship 
of  God,  is  a  true  visible  church  of  Christ."  Penry 
says :  ^*  "This  church  (Christ's)  I  believe  to  be  a 
company  of  those  whcn^  the  word  calleth  saints, 
which  do  not  only  profess  in  word  that  they  know 
God,  but  are  subject  to  his  laws  and  ordinances 
indeed."  The  Confession  of  the  Low  Country 
Exiles,  art.  xxxiii.,  says  :^^  "  Christians  are  willingly 
to  join  together  in  Christian  communion  and  or- 
derly covenant;  and,  by  free  confession  of  the 
faith  and  obedience  of  Christ,  to  unite  themselves 
into  peculiar  and  visible  congregations."  J.  Daven- 
port ^^  says :  "  The  church  of  Christ  arises  from  the 
coadunition  or  knitting  together  of  many  saints 
into  one  by  a  holy  covenant,  whereby  they,  as  lively 
stones,  are  built  into  a  spiritual  house,  1  Pet.  ii. 
4,  5.  Though  church  covenant  be  common  to  all 
churches  in  its  general  nature,  yet  there  is  a  special 
combination  which  gives  a  peculiar  being  to  one 
Congregational  church  and  its  members,  distinct 
from  ail  others."  —  See  also,  for  corroboration  of  the 
same  sentiments,  Burrough's  Irenicum,  in  Han.  iii. 
115 ;  Bartlett's  Model,  in  ib.  239 ;  Savoy  Declara- 
tion, in  ib.  545,  546 ;  Camb.  Platform,  chap.  2,  sect. 
6,  and  chap.  4 ;  Wise's  Vindication,  chap.  2 ;  Lord 
King's  Enquiry,  part  i.  3,  7 ;  Hooker's  Survey,  part 
i.  46 ;  Hutchinson's  Hist.  Mass.  370,  371 ;  Hall's 
Puritans,  294 ;  S.  Mather's  Apology,  2 ;  Increase 
Mather's  Dis.  Ecc.  Councils,  preface ;  Owen's  Com- 
plete  Works,  xix.   213,  505,   and  xx.   370,   371; 


CHURCH.  55 

Watts's  Works,  iii.  198,  250 ;  Cotton  Mather's  Rat. 
Dis.  10,  11  ;  Eaton's  and  Taylor's  Defence,  44 ; 
Letchford's  Plain  Dealing,  epistle  to  the  reader ; 
Dwight,  Serm.  cxlix. ;  Emmons,  v.  444 — 446 ;  and 
Principles  of  Church  Order  by  the  Congregational 
Union  of  England  and  Wales,  art.  i.  in  Hanbury, 
iii.  599.  —  See  Covenant. 

*  Ans.  to  Bernard,  in  Punchard's  Hist.  331 ;  and  Han.  i.  214  ; 
and  Works,  ii.  232.  *  lb.  389,  note ;  and  Works,  iii.  427.  ^  Pro- 
testation Protested,  in  Han.  ii.  73.  ■*  lb.  231.  *  Marrow  of  Sa- 
cred Divinity,  135.  ®  Art.  viii.  in  Hanbury,  i.  296.  ^  Answer  to  Ten 
Counter  Demands,  ib.  367.  "  Richard  Mather's  Apology,  5 — 25, 
and  Church  Gov.  and  Church  Gov.  9,  11;  Ans.  of  the  N.  E. 
Elders,  75  ;  Cotton's  Way  of  the  Churches,  2.  »  Page  25.  ^"  Ch. 
Gov.  chap.  iii.  49—54.  "  Ib.  242.  "  Ib.  249,  251,  256.  "  Pages 
7,  8.  *4  English  Puritanism,  in  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  248.  '*  Decla- 
ration of  Allegiance  to  her  Majesty,  in  Han.  i.  81.  ^^  Ib.  95. 
*'  Power  of  Congregational  Churches,  in  ib.  ii.  62. 


CHURCH,  of  ivhat  constituted  ?  —  Lord  King  de- 
fines it:*  All  professors  of  religion  ;  —  a  particular 
church  ;  -.-  a  meeting-house  ;  —  once  only  in  the  Fa- 
thers, a  collection  of  churches;  —  and  sometimes 
the  invisible  church.  Isaac  Chauncy  ^  shows  that 
the  word  church  is  derived  from  Kuriou  oikos,  — 
House  of  God ;  that  there  is  no  just  ground  for  ap- 
plying such  a  trope  (church)  to  a  house  for  a  pub- 
lic assembly;  that  men's  laws  cannot  establish 
churches,  but  they  must  be  built  after  the  pattern 
which  God  shows ;  that  a  true  church  may  be 
discovered  by  its  being  on  the  foundation,  Jesus 
Christ ;  by  the  visible  matter,  living  stones ;  by  the 
form,  fashion,  and  frame,  according  to  the  gospel. 


56  CHURCH. 

It  is  no  church  if  either  of  these  be  wholly  wanting ; 
faulty  where  these  are  defective.  Lobb  ^  quotes 
Humphrey,  a  great  anti-separatist:  "  The  Congre- 
gationalists  stand  here.  The  church  of  Christ  is  a 
number  of  truly  faithful,  regenerate  persons."  Dr. 
Emmons  "^  says  :  "  There  is  an  invisible  and  a  visi- 
ble church.  The  invisible  church  comprehends  all 
real  saints.  By  a  visible  church  we  are  to  under- 
stand a  society  of  visible  saints."  Greenwood,*  being 
asked,  "  Is  not  the  whole  land,  as  now  ordered,  a 
true  church  ?  "  answered  emphatically,  "  No."  For 
this  and  similar  sentiments,  he  became  a  martyr. 
Dr.  Hopkins  says,®  that  the  word  church  "  signifies 
an  assembly  of  men,  called  and  collected  together 
for  some  special  purpose.  The  church  of  Christ  on 
earth  consists  of  those  who  are  united  together  as 
professed  friends  to  Christ  and  believers  in  him,  are 
under  explicit  engagements  to  serve  him,"  &c.  .  ,  . 
"  Whenever  a  number  of  persons  voluntarily  unite 
together,  under  profession  of  holiness  in  Christ,  to 
attend  to  his  institutions  and  ordinances,  they  are  a 
church."  The  second  chapter  of  Cambridge  Plat- 
form establishes  the  same  position. 

»  Part  i.  2—5.  '^  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  1—8.  ^  True 
Dissenter,  98.  *  Vol.  v.  444.  *  In  Han.  i.  62.  «  System,  ii.  224, 
225. 

CHURCH,  mode  of  constituting. —  A  summary 
of  the  usual  ceremonies  in  constituting  a  church  is 
given  in  Cotton's  Way  of  the  Churches,*  and  Cot. 
Mather's  Ratio  Disciplinas,'^  which  does  not  essen- 
tially differ   from   those  now   generally  practised, 


CHURCH.  57 

save  that  the  brethren  of  the  churches  invited,  nomi- 
nated as  many  delegates  as  they  chose.  In  Cot- 
ton's time,  however,  the  candidates  appointed  one 
of  their  own  number  to  read  the  covenant,  and 
one  of  the  council  to  give  them  the  right  hand  of 
fellowship.  Whoever  reads  the  more  ancient  trea- 
tises on  Congregationalism,  and  proceeds  to  the 
more  modern  ones,  will  perceive  a  gradual  increase 
to  the  prerogatives  claimed  by  councils.  "  Facilis 
descensusJ^  Letchford  ^  says  :  "  At  gathering  of 
churches,  one  of  the  messengers  examines  the  can- 
didates ;  and,  on  acknowledging  their  covenant,  he 
pronounces  them  a  true  church,  and  gives  them  the 
right  hand  of  fellowship.  So  did  Mr.  Welde  at 
the  founding  of  Weymouth  Church."  A  church  was 
gathered  at  Lynn  ^  for  Long  Island.  He  quotes^ 
from  the  Answer  of  the  Elders  in  Boston,  to  a 
question  which  he  put  to  them :  Though  it  be  not 
usual,  "  yet  it  is  lawful  to  gather  a  church  without 
other  churches  and  ministers  to  advise,"  Dr.  Har- 
ris^ states  that  the  first  church  in  Dorchester  was 
gathered  in  Dorchester,  England.  Mr.  White 
preached  in  the  forenoon,  and  in  the  afternoon 
Messrs.  Wareham  and  Maverick  were  chosen  and 
separated  to  the  care  of  the  intended  congregation, 
and  they  preached  in  the  afternoon.  The  formation 
of  Richard  Mather's  church  in  Dorchester  was  for 
a  time  delayed,  because  the  members  failed  to 
satisfy  the  council  of  their  experimental  piety.^ 

»  Pages  8—10.  *  Pages  3—12.  ^  Plain  Dealing,  in  Mass.  Hist. 
Col.  ser.  iii.  vol.  iii.  65.  *  lb.  98.  *  lb.  107.  •  lb.  ser.  i.  vol.  ix. 
148.     '  Hubbard's  Hist.  Mass.  273. 


58  CHURCH. 

CHURCH,  ministers  not  necessary  to  constitute.  — 
Barrowe  ^  shows  that  otherwise  the  existence  of 
churches  would  depend  on  the  will  of  ministers. 
But  the  "faithful  are  commanded  to  gather  to- 
gether in  Christ's  name ;  ...  for  the  kingdom  of 
God  consisteth  not  in  word,  but  in  power."  Cam- 
bridge Platform  declares  ^  that  officers  are  not  ne- 
cessary to  the  simple  being  of  churches.  Goodwin  ^ 
says :  "  It  is  Christ's  prerogative  alone  to  build  and 
erect  a  church,  ivithout  the  intervention  of  ministe- 
rial ecclesiastical  power  to  derive  that  power  to 
them.  .  .  .  Churches  to  be  erected  may  and  ought 
to  have  the  direction  and  consent  of  neighbor 
churches,  because  a  new  sister  is  to  be  added  to 
and  associated  with  them :  but  they  receive  no 
power  from  them  to  become  a  church."  "  Nor  *  are 
ministers  or  their  power  necessary  to  the  first  gath- 
ering of  a  church.  They  may  have  a  hand  in  it 
by  directing  and  exhorting  to  it,  .  .  .  "but  the  power 
is  in  ourselves  immediately.  .  .  .  They  (ministers) 
are  to  be  set  in  churches,  so  there  were  churches 
gathered  ere  elders  were  made  in  them."  —  See 
Letchford's  quotation  from  the  Answer  of  Boston 
Elders  to  his  question,  mentioned  in  previous  arti- 
cle, viz.  Church,  mode  of  constituting';  Churches 
begun  without  officers,  ^c, 

*  Some  of  the  Reasons  of  our  Separation,  in  Han.  i.  54.  ^  Chap. 
vi.  sect.  2.     3  Church  Gov.  208.    *  lb.  257. 

CHURCH,  what  number  of  members  may  consti- 
tute ?  —  Cotton,^  Richard  Mather  and  William 
Tompson,^  and  Cotton  Mather,'  all  maintain  that 


CHURCH.  59 

seven  males  aie  the  least  number  that  can  be  pro- 
perly constituted  into  a  church,  because  they  held 
that  number  necessary  to  a  case  of  discipline,  as  in 
Matt,  xviii.  This  assumes  that  neither  the  accuser 
nor  the  witness  to  the  second  step  may  vote,  and 
that  the  rest  of  the  church  must  outnumber  the 
accuser,  the  witness,  and  the  accused.  Each  of 
these  points  seems,  however,  to  need  proof  before 
it  is  implicitly  adopted.  John  Robinson  (see  on 
Church,  what  constitutes  ?)  limits  it  only  to  two  or 
three ;  and  many  of  the  old  Congregational  writers  ^ 
supposed  this  to  be  the  meaning  of  Matt,  xviii.  20. 
Cambridge  Platform  says  *  that  it  "  ought  not  to 
be  of  greater  number  than  may  ordinarily  meet 
together  conveniently  in  one  place,  nor  fewer  than 
can  conveniently  carry  on  church  work."  Prince  ^ 
enumerates  among  the  principles  of  Robinson's 
church,  "  A  particular  church  should  consist  of  no 
more  than  can  conveniently  watch  over  each  other, 
and  meet  in  one  congregation."  Eaton  and  Tay- 
lor ^  say,  "  Seven,  eight,  or  nine  may  make  a  church." 
See  Upham,  Rat.  Dis.  ^^^  56 ;  Punchard,  View,  47. 
—  See  Churches,  distinct  bodies, 

»  Way  of  the  Churches,  53.  ^  Ans.  to  Herle,  in  Han.  ii.  172. 
3  Rat.  Dis.  2.  ■*  As  Goodwin,  Ch.  Goy.  257.  *  Chap.  iii.  sect.  4. 
•  Chronology,  91.    '  Defence,  9. 

CHURCH,  may  one,  have  branches  ?  —  Hooker  * 
informs  us  that,  in  his  time,  a  church  sometimes 
sent  out  a  colony,  with  part  of  its  officers,  before 
they  were  separated  into  a  distinct  church.  "  Mr. 
"Wheelwright  ^  was  minister  to  a  branch  of  Boston 


60  CllUKCU. 

Church,  in  a  place  since  called  Braintrce,  where  the 
town  had  some  lands."  This  practice  was,  how- 
ever, generally  discouraged,  as  it  was  the  very  thing 
known  to  have  helped  to  diocesan  and  metropoli- 
tan domination  over  the  primitive  churches.  —  See 
Punchard's  Hist.  20.  Also  Church,  what  number 
of  7;V3mbers  may  constitute  ? 

Survey,  part  i.  128.    *  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  483. 

CHURCH,  the  majority  constitute.  —  John  Robin- 
son and  his  church  in  Leyden  advocate  this  prin- 
ciple (in  a  letter  to  a  church  in  London),*  even 
where  that  majority  are  in  error,  and  even  hetero- 
dox. Dr.  Hopkins'  says,  in  matters  wherein  the 
church  as  a  body  are  to  decide  and  act,  they  must 
be  determined  by  the  voice  of  the  major  part.  He 
shows  that  the  minority  must  submit  and  conform, 
unless  against  their  conscientious  views  of  right; 
in  which  case  no  one  has  any  right  to  control  them. 
—  See  Majorities,  Minorities. 

» In  Han.  i.  449,  450 ;  and  Works,  iii.  385.     =  System,  ii.  226. 

CHURCH,  officers  of. —  Congregationalists  in  all 
ages  have  agreed  that  pastors  and  deacons  are  church 
officers;  that  pastors  and  bishops  are  the  same 
in  Scripture  language ;  and  that  the  special  duty  of 
deacons  is  to  take  care  of  the  poor,  and  of  the  tem- 
poral interests  of  the  church.  Formerly  they  gene- 
rally maintained,  that  teachers  and  ruling  elders, 
and,  to  some  extent,  that  deaconesses  or  widows, 
were  of  divine  appointment,  rulers  and  helps  in  the 
churches.     This  opinion,  however,  was  never  uni- 


CHURCH.  Ql 

versal  among  them.     John  Owen »  held  to  essen- 
tially the  same  organization  which  prevails  in  New 
England  at  the  present  day,  and  confounds  pastors, 
teachers,  and  elders  in  one  and  the  ^me  office.    As 
early  as  1679,  this  had  become  the  general  practice 
in  Massachusetts.     The  synod  of  that  year,  how- 
ever, lament'  "  that  there  is,  in  most  of  the  churches, 
but  one  teaching  officer."     (See  Pastor,  Teacher,' 
Minister,    Evangelist,    Elders,    Deacons,    Wi- 
DOAvs.)     Many  churches  have  of  late  added  stand- 
ing committees,   which   are   recommended   in  the 
Congregational   Manual,^' with  "special  duty  to  in- 
stitute discipline  for  public  offences,  if  the  same  be 
not   seasonably  done   by  other    members."     This 
method  of  delegating  duties  is,  however,  question- 
able.    Mitchell,^  though  he  approves  of  such  com- 
mittees, with  "  a  general  oversight  of  the  ordinary 
interests  of  the  church,"  cautions  lest  they  be  in- 
vested with  powers  almost  identical  with  a  Presby- 
terian session.      To  commit  the  watch  and  care  of 
a  church  to  a  permanent  committee,  so  as  to  dis- 
charge the  church  as  a  body  from  their  duties,  is 
not  Congregationalism.^— See  Power  of  Church 
cannot  be  given  away  nor  delegated ;   Officers  not 
to  be  multiplied;  Officers,  ivhat  ? 

»  Catechism,  quest,  xxiii. ;  Complete  Works,  xix.  519.   ^  White's 
Lamentations,  in  Wise's  Vindication,  167.     ^  Pa<Te  28.     -»  Guide 
142.     5  lb.  143. 

CHURCH,  in  what  sense  one.  — 3ohn  Robinson* 
says  that  it  is  "  one  in  nature,  not  one  in  number, 
as  one  ocean.     Neither  was  the  church  at  Rome, 

6 


02  CHURCH. 

in  the  apostle's  days,  more  one  with  the  church  at 
Corinth  than  was  the  baptism  of  Peter  one  with 
Paul's  baptism^  or  than  Peter  and  Paul  were  one." 
John  Milton  ^  says :  "  The  Christian  church  is  uni- 
versal, not  tied  to  nation,  diocese,  or  parish,  but 
consisting  of  many  particular  churches,  complete  in 
themselves."  See  Cambridge  Platform,  chap.  ii. 
sect.  3,  4 ;  Cotton's  Way  of  the  Churches,  10 ; 
Hooker's  Survey,  part  i.  62,  81,  220,  253—274,  part 
iii.  19. —  See  Churches,  distinct  bodies. 

'  Apology,  in  Han.  i.  374.     *  To  Salmasius,  in  Han.  iii.  373. 

CHURCH,  duty  of  believers  to  join.  —  Eaton  and 
Taylor  *  say:  "  So  long  as  a  believer  doth  not  join 
himself  to  some  particular  church,  he  is  without, 
ill  the  apostle's  sense,  1  Cor.  v.  12."  See  the  duty 
advocated  in  Owen,  xix.  215,  and  xx.  188;  but 
especially  in  Ainsworth's  Communion  of  Saints,  in 
Han.  i.  278,  279 ;  and  Cambridge  Platform,  ch.  iv. 
sect.  6,  which  treats  of  the  evils  of  not  performing 
the  duty.  Dr.  Emmons,  v.  460 — 464,  gives  six 
"  reasons  why  the  subjects  of  special  grace  will 
choose  to  join  the  church,  and  enter  into  covenant 
with  God."  —  See  Punchard,  View,  37,  38  ;  Up- 
ham,  Rat.  Dis.  49,  50. 

*  Defence,  74. 

CHURCH,  Romish^  is  it  a  true  one  ?  —  Ainsworth, 
in  his  reply  to  Johnson,*  maintains  that  it  is  Anti- 
christ ;  that  there  is  as  much  difference  between  the 
church  of  Rome  now  and  of  old,  as  between  the 
bishop  of  Rome  now  and  the  bishop  then :  "  The 


CHURCHES.  63 

antichristian  church  is  to  be  esteemed  in  a  state  of 
damnation,  though  some  of  God's  elect  hidden 
ones  are  in  the  same."  Johnson  had  maintained 
the  contrary  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Reformed 
Churches.^* 

>  In  Han.  i.  323.    «  lb.  314—320. 

CHURCH-MEETINGS,  by  whom  called.— While 
ruling  elders  were  considered  a  separate  order  of 
church  officers,  this  privilege  and  duty  was  sup- 
posed to  be  vested  in  the  church  presbytery  in  the 
bench  of  elders.  When  there  came  to  be  but  one 
elder  in  a  certain  church,  he  prevented  a  church 
meeting  for  fourteen  years.*  Cotton  Mather  ^  says : 
"  Nor  do  the  New  England  churches  think  that 
ordinarily  a  church  meeting  may  be  regularly  held 
without  the  consent  of  their  pastors."  It  will  be 
evident,  however,  that  the  pastors  have  not  usually 
been  considered  as  having  power  to  prevent  church 
meetings,  if  we  consult  the  arguments  deduced 
under  these  heads,  viz. :  —  Ministers,  people  may 
do  their  work  for  them  if  they  refuse  ;  Officers  ab- 
dicate ivhen  they  refuse  to  do  their  duties ;  Churches 
begnin  without  officers,  and  may  continue  despite  of 
officers;  Government,  church,  in  the  people;  Power, 
church,  installed  in  ministry  or  brethren  ? 

*  White's  Lamentations  in  Wise's  Vindication,  166.  ^  Rat. 
Dis.  164. 

CHURCHES,  distinct  bodies,  i.e,  not  parts  of  one 
cojisolidated  one.  —  Richard  Mather,  in  his  Apology,* 
shows  from  several  passages  of  Scripture,  as  1  Thes, 


64  CHURCHES. 

ii.  14  and  Rev.  i.  4,  that  they  were  considered  dis- 
tinct bodies  in  the  days  of  the  apostles.  In  his 
Church  Government,'^  he  shows  that  they  consisted 
of  no  mipre  than  could  meet  in  one  congregation, 
united  into  one  body  by  a  holy  covenp.nt;  —  that 

»  those  within  the  visible  church  must  necessarily  be 
members  of  particular  churches ;  —  that  the  duty 
of  excommunicating  incorrigible  offenders  belongs, 
not  to  a  universal,  but  to  a  particular  church;  — 
and  that  "judging  them  that  are  within,"  implies 
that  they  were  in  particular  churches.  He  quotes 
Mr.  Baine,'  that,  though  churches  have  power  to 
govern  themselves,  yet,  for  greater  edification,  they 
confederate  not  to  use  or  exercise  their  power,  but 
with  mutual  communion,  one  asking  counsel  and 
consent  of  the  other.  And  he  says,*  that  "  to  bind 
churches  to  do  no  weighty  matter  without  the 
counsel  and  consent  of  classes  were  to  bind  them 
to  be  imperfect."  By  the  above  assertions  he  seems 
to  advocate  the  advisory,  not  the  judicial  power  of 
councils.  Cotton*  shows  that  a  church  must  be 
such  a  body  that  an  offended  brother  can  tell  his 
case  to,  and  with  them  cast  the  offender  out  of  the 

*  church.  He  speaks  ^  of  "  the  chimera  of  a  universal 
visible  church."  Burton  ^  challenges  the  evidence 
of  any  but  particular  churches  for  the  first  four  or 
five  hundred  years.  John  Robinson,  in  his  Apo- 
logy,^ is  very  plain  and  positive  on  this  point.  T. 
Goodwin  ^  shows  that  they  must  be  distinct,  —  from 
the  nature  and  Scripture  process  of  discipline ;  from 
the  Scripture  examples  of  their  conduct ;  from  in- 
dividual churches  being  addressed  as  whole  bodies. 


CHURCHES.  65 

a  whole  lump,  whole  flock,  &c. ;  and  their  being 
so  often  addressed  in  Scripture  in  the  plural  num- 
ber. The  doctrine  of  distinct  churches  ^°  was  one 
of  the  main  positions  of  the  supplication  of  the 
exiles  and  others  to  King  James  I.  on  his  acces- 
sion. Henry  Jacob,  in  his  Divine  Beginning  and 
Institution  of  Christ's  Church,  says  :  "  "  Christ 
teacheth,  yea  requireth,  in  Matt,  xviii.  17,  that 
this  visible  and  ministerial  church  shall  be  ever  of 
one  entire  outward  form,  viz.  of  this  special  form 
of  a  particular  ordinary  congregation  and  none 
other,  ...  and  the  very  word  ekklesia  doth  properly 
signify  so."  In  his  Declaration  it  was  one  of  the 
main  positions,*^  "  that  a  true  church,  under  the 
gospel,  containeth  no  more  congregations  but  one." 
Francis  Johnson  *'  infers,  that  God  hath  not  or- 
dained any  other  than  particular  churches,  from 
what  is  recorded  in  the  Bible  of  the  seven  churches 
of  Asia  generally,  and  particularly  of  those  at  Jeru- 
salem, Lystra,  Iconium,  Antioch,  Troas,*  Ephesus, 
Rome,  Cenchrea,  Corinth,  Galatia,  Philippi,  Colosse, 
Laodicea,  and  Thessalonica.  The  distinctness  of 
churches  is  urged  in  the  Apologetical  Narrative 
of  the  Independents  in  the  Westminister  Assem- 
bly.'^ So  it  is  in  Bartlett's  Model.'"  John  Owen 
says : '®  "I  do  not  say  absolutely  that  particular 
churches  are  not  the  parts  of  the  catholic  visible,  in 
any  sense,  but  that  they  are  not  so  parts  of  it  that 
it  should  be  made  up  by  them  and  of  them  for  the 
order  and  purpose  of  an  instituted  church."  He 
shows,  in  his  Original  of  Churches,  chap,  iv.''  that 
a  church  means  an  assembly,  and  therefore  has 
6* 


66  CHURCHES. 

reference  to  those  who  assemble  in  one  place. 
And,  in  his  Nature  of  Schism,  chap,  vii.^*  he  shows 
that  it  was  acknowledged  by  Episcopalians,  that  a 
church  originally  consisted  of  no  more  than  could 
meet  in  one  place ;  and  their  bishops  were  Congre- 
gational, and  not  diocesan.  Lord  King  says : *'  "I 
find  the  word  church  once  used  by  Cyprian  for  a 
collection  of  churches ;  as  the  church  of  Africa  and 
Numidia ;  otherwise  I  cannot  remember  that  I  ever 
met  with  it  in  this  sense  in  any  of  the  writings  of 
this  or  the  rest  of  the  fathers :  but,  whenever  they 
would  speak  of  the  Christians  in  any  kingdom  or 
province,  they  always  said,  in  the  plural,  *the 
churches ; '  never,  in  the  singular,  *  the  church '  of 
such  a  kingdom  or  province."  So  much  for  the  tes- 
timony of  an  impartial  witness.  The  Boston  mini- 
sters, in  1690,^"  maintain  that  particular  church 
organizations  are  indispensable  to  scriptural  disci- 
pline. Isaao*  Chauncy^^  shows  that  the  Spirit  of 
God  always  speaks  of  churches,  in  their  respective 
places,  as  distinct  bodies ;  each  one  entire  in  itself. 
There  is  not  an  epistle  written  to  the  catholic  visi- 
ble church.  Each  particular  congregation  had  its 
proper  elders,  relating  to  tY,  and  not  to  the  catholic 
visible.  So  Hunter,  in  his  Life  of  Oliver  Hey- 
wood.^^  Robert  Hall  ^^  reasons  very  clearly  on  this 
point.  Ames^*  shows  from  E-ev.  i.  4  and  2  Cor. 
viii.  1,  19,  that  there  are  as  many  visible  churches 
as  there  are  congregations.  "  Neither "  is  this 
church,  that  is  instituted  by  God,  properly  national, 
provincial,  or  diocesan  ;  which  forms  were  brought 
in  by  men ;  but  is  parochial,  or  of  one  congrega- 


CHURCHES.  67 

tion  ;  the  members  whereof  are  combined  among 
themselves,  and  do  ordinarily  meet  in  one  place,  to 
the  public  exercises  of  religion."  Dr.  Hopkins^® 
says  that  every  society  of  visible  believers  is  .  . . 
called  a  church ;  as  the  church  at  Antioch,  the 
church  at  Ephesus,  the  churches  in  Judea,  &c.  — 
See  Church,  what  constitutes  ?  In  what  sense  is  it 
one  ?  Wliat  number  of  members  constitute  ?  See 
also  Robinson's  Apology,  in  Han.  i.  372,  373 ;  and 
Upham,  Rat.  Dis.  44—48. 

»  Pages  11,  14.  2  Pages  9—11.  »  lb.  65.  ^  lb.  *  Way  of 
the  Churches,  1,2.  ^  lb.  10.  "^  Answer  to  Prynne's  Full  Reply, 
21.  8  In  Hanbury,  i.  372—374  ;  and  Works,  iii.  12—17.  »  Ch. 
Gov.  61,  52,  63,  235 ;  and  Catechism,  6.  »*  Han.  i.  114.  "  lb. 
229.  "  lb.  231.  "  Refoi-med  Churches,  in  ib.  314.  *<  lb.  ii.  225. 
'*  Ib.  iii.  246—248.  ^^  Vindication  Cong.  Churches,  ib.  457. 
"  Vol.  XX.  122.  ^8  Vol.  xix.  214.  ^^  Enquiry,  part  i.  4,  5. 
*  Principles  of  the  Protestant  Religion,  129.  ^^  Divine  Inst.  Cong. 
Churches,  34,  35.  ^^  Page  58.  ^  Vol.  i.  332,  333.  ^  Marrow  of 
Sacred  Divinity,  139.     ^5  ib.  173.     se  System,  ii.  224. 

CHURCHES,  instituted  bodies. —  Dr.  Goodwin 
wrote  the  first  two  books  of  his  Church  Govern- 
ment to  prove  "  that  the  order  and  government  of 
the  churches  are  established  by  divine  institution  ; 
.  .  .  that  Christ  has  settled  ordinances  for  worship 
and  discipline,  which  are  to  continue  I0  the  end  of 
the  world ;  .  .  .  that  a  Congregational  church  is 
thus  of  divine  institution  ;  .  .  .  that  Christ  instituted 
such  a  church  in  Matt,  xviii. ;  .  .  .  that  such  Congre- 
gational churches  were  primitive  and  apostolical ; 
.  .  .  and  that  Christ  hath  not  only  instituted  a  Con- 
gregational church,  but  appointed  what  the  extent 
and  limits  of  it  should  be."     The  treatise  is  too 


68  CHURCHES. 

extensive  to  admit  of  even  an  epitome  in  a  single 
article.  Suffice  it  to  say,  that,  when  the  student 
has  read  and  digested  the  whole  work  of  four  hun- 
dred and  sixty-two  folio  pages,  it  will  not  be  easy 
for  him  to  conclude  that  Congregationalism  is  a 
nonentity.  Then  let  him  read  the  four  Mathers, 
Owen,  Watts,  Isaac  Chauncy,  and  a  host  of  others, 
and  he  may  begin  to  mistrust  that  there  were  giants 
in  the  earth  even  in  those  scouted  puritanical  days. 
Owen,^  in  his  Original  of  Churches,  chaps,  i^  iii., 
shows  that  God  only  can  change  the  state  or  dis- 
pensation of  his  church ;  that  the  original  of  their 
church  state  is  derived  directly  from  Christ,  as  to 
their  right  and  title ;  that  whatever  is  required  in 
them,  by  the  light  of  nature,  is  of  divine  institution  ; 
and  that,  as  the  Scriptures  require  a  church,  it  is 
lawful  for  Christians  to  gather  into  one.  Samuel 
Mather^  also  asserts  that  the  ecclesiastical  state  is 
a  divine  institution.  Davenport  says :  ^  "  Because 
all  nations  could  not  be  joined  together  in  one 
visible  church,  the  Lord  Jesus  instituted  a  Congre- 
gational church,  and  calls  every  Congregational 
church  his  church."  —  See  Chauncy's  Divine  Insti- 
tution of  Cong.  Churches,  23,  30,  51,  52 ;  and 
Upham,  Rat.  Dis.  34, 47.  See  Government,  churchy 
instituted.  Not  lawful  to  alter.  Not  varied  to  suit 
circumstances. 

^  Vol.  XX.  65—79,  99.    ^  Apology,  31.    ^  Power  of  Congrega- 
tional Churches,  in  Han.  ii.  63. 

CHURCHES,  the  primitive^  were  Congregational, 
—  Goodwin  argues  this  point  at  large  in  the  sixth, 


CHURCHES.  69 

seventh,  eighth,  and  ninth  chapters  of  his  second 
book  on  Church  Government,  —  from  instances  of 
primitive  churches-  planted  by  the  apostles,  as  that 
of  Corinth,  required  to  do  church-work  within  itself, 
by  the  power  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  to  judge 
them  that  were  within,  excommunicate,  and  the 
like;  —  from  several  texts,  as  1  Cor.  xi.  18;  Eom. 
xvi.  1 — 5 ;  1  Cor.  iv.  17.  He  shows,^  that  the  word 
church  never  means  an  assembly  of  officers,  but  of 
the  people.  He  also  argues  the  same  from  in- 
stances of  the  churches  settled  by  the  apostles  in 
the  lesser  cities,  and  also  from  the  fact  that  the 
churches  of  the  several  cities  were  entire  churches, 
having  government  within  themselves.  Even  Arch- 
bishop Whitgift^  declares  that  the  "state  of  the 
church  was  popular  in  the  apostles'  time."  See 
Murdock's  Mosheim,  ed.  1832,  i.  81—86.  Neander 
says  '  that  each  individual  church  had  a  bishop  and 
presbyter  of  its  own,  and  assumed  to  itself  the 
rights  of  a  little  distinct  republic  or  commonwealth. 
Samuel  Mather*  maintains  that  every  church,  for 
the  first  two  hundred  years,  was  Congregational,  and 
that  churches  were  then  always  spoken  of  in  the 
plural  number.  And*  he  quotes  from  Father  Paul 
of  Venice,  and  Cyprian,  to  show  that  the  church  in 
the  beginning  had  altogether  a  democratic  form, 
and  how  it  was  gradually  changed.  Isaac  Chauncy  ^ 
shows  that  "  either  a  Congregational  church  is  of 
divine  institution,  or  else  God  hath  no  institutea 
church."  —  See  Punchard,  View,  122  ;  also  Cotton's 
Way  of  the  Churches  Cleared,  chap.  iv.  93 — 99. 
See  Churches,  distinct  bodies. 


70  CHURCHES. 

»  Page  73.    «  In  Han.  i.  10.     '^  In  Hall's  Puritans,  307.    -•  Apo- 
logy,  10—13.    *  lb.  27,  28.    «  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  30. 


CHURCHES  subject  to  no  external  jurisdiction. — 
This  has  ever  been  a  cardinal  doctrine  of  strict 
Congregationalism.  Bradshaw  ^  says :  "  Christ  has 
not  subjected  any  church  or  congregation  to  any 
other  superior  ecclesiastical' jurisdiction  than  that 
which  is  within  itself;  ...  no  other  churches  or 
spiritual  officers  have  power  to  censure  or  punish 
them,  but  only  to  counsel  and  advise  them."  Dr. 
Price  says  ^  of  the  Independents  in  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly :  "  They  were  distinguished  from  the 
Presbyterians  by  maintaining  the  absolute  inde- 
pendence of  each  church,  so  far  as  jurisdiction 
and  discipline  are  concerned,  and  by  denying  the 
communication  of  spiritual  power  in  ordination." 
Themselves  explain,  in  their  Apologetical  Narra- 
tive:'  "  Not  that  they  claim  an  entire  independency 
with  regard  to  other  churches  ;  for  they  agree,  that, 
in  all  cases  of  offence,  the  offending  is  to  submit  to 
an  open  examination  by  other  neighbor  churches ; 
and,  on  their  persisting  in  their  error  or  miscarriage, 
then  they  are  to  renounce  all  Christian  communion 
with  them  till  they  repent ;  which  is  all  the  authority 
or  ecclesiastical  power  which  one  church  has  over 
another."  This  they  call  a  "  middle  way  between 
Brownism  and  Presbytery."  Davenport^  held  the 
power  of  every  particular  church  to  be  chief  in 
its  own  particular  matters.  The  publisher  to  his 
Power  of  Congregational  Churches  says  :  *  "  There 
are  two  things  which  run  through  this  whole  dis- 


CHURCHES.  71 

course,  and  are  legible  in  every  line  of  it :  First, 
that  the  power  of  churches  is  confined  to  their  res 
•propria^  their  own  proper  matters;  second,  that 
there  is  not  any  spiritual  church  power,  to  which 
they  are,  by  the  institution  of  Christ,  subjected ;  — 
two  grand  pillar-principles  of  the  Congregational 
way."  The  treatise  on  the  Institution  of  Churches, 
in  the   Savoy  Confession,  says :  ^    "  Besides  these  ^ 

particular  churches,  there  is  not  instituted  any  church 
more  extensive  or  catholic;"  and  the  whole  con- 
nection shows  that  they  are  subject  to  no  jurisdic- 
tion out  of  themselves.  Hooker  "^  clearly  admits  the 
same  principle,  and  only  admits  counsel  "  to  clear 
the  truth."  In  Hutchinson's  History  of  Massachu- 
setts ^  it  is  laid  down  as  a  fundamental  principle  of 
Congregationalism,  "  That  there  is  no  jurisdiction, 
to  which  particular  churches  are  or  ought  to  be 
subject,  by  way  of  authoritative  censure."  And  the 
Congregational  Union  of  England  and  Wales,  in 
1833,  re-affirmed  the  same  doctrine  in  their  Decla- 
ration of  Faith  and  Order,^  art.  iv. :  "  They  believe 
that  the  New  Testament  authorizes  every  Christian 
church  ...  to  stand  independent,  and  irresponsible 
to  all  authority,  saving  that  only  supreme  and 
divine  Head  of  the  church,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 
Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,'^  says  :  "  No  church 
or  officers  have  power  over  another,  but  by  ad- 
vice or  counsel  voluntarily  given  or  besought."  Dr. 
Stiles  says  :  "  "  Our  churches  acknowledge  no 
jurisdiction  of  sister  churches  over  them,  but  hold 
themselves  to  be  capable,  and  to  have  the  power, 
to  determine  all  matters  of  discipline  that  arise  in  a 


72  CHURCHES. 

particular  church."  And  ^^  "the  moment  jurisdic- 
tion enters,  like  creating  Csesar  perpetual  dictator, 
the  beginning  of  the  absolute  loss  of  liberty  com- 
mences. .  .  .  The  exigencies  of  the  Christian  church 
can  never  be  such  as  to  legitimate,  much  less  to 
render  it  wise,  to  erect  any  body  of  men  into  a 
standing  judicatory  over  them."  Punchard  ^^  quotes 
Mosheim,  Murdock's  edition,  i.  80 — 86,  abundantly 
sustaining  the  same  doctrines.  —  See  Council  ; 
Synod  ;  Churches  distinct  bodies ;  Power,  church, 
installed  in  ministry  or  brethren  ? 

*  English  Puritanism,  chap.  ii.  art.  4,  in  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  248. 
2  lb.  462,  note.  »  lb.  492.  "  Paget,  in  Han.  i.  541,  545.  ^  lb.  ii. 
61.  «  Art.  vi.  26  ;  iii.  545.  '  Survey,  part  iii.  40—44.  »  Vol.  i. 
371.  ^  In  Han.  iii.  600.  ^"  In  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol. 
iii.  74.     ^^  Conven.  Serm.  45.     ^^  Pages  89,  91.    "  View,  145,  146. 

CHURCHES  discipline  each  other,  but  not  juridi- 
cally. —  Goodwin  ^  &ays :  "  Churches  proceed  with 
churches  not  politice,  or  as  armed  by  Christ  with 
juridical  power  of  giving  up  to  Satan ;  but  they 
proceed  and  deal  with  each  other  modo  mystico,  or 
with  a  moral  declarative  power  only."  He  shows  ^ 
that  though  one  church  has  a  right  to  call  upon 
another  to  give  them  satisfaction,  yet  it  may  not 
abridge  their  liberty.  He  maintains '  that  synods 
have  no  juridical  power  thus  to  judge  churches, 
and*  that  this  power  to  discipline  is  only  in  a  moral 
way,  in  distinction  from  an  instituted  one.  Book 
V.  chap.  12,  he  devotes  to  showing  that  though  no 
church  nor  churches  have  power  to  excommunicate 
another  church,  yet  they  have  power  to  declare 
non-communion  with  them;   but  that  they  are  a 


CHUKCHES.  73 

church  still.  The  apologists  in  the  Westminister 
Assembly*  hold  the  same  doctrine.  Cotton,  in  his 
Keys,^  seems  to  advocate  the  same,  yet  in  the  next 
'  page  he  appears  to  hold  that  there  was  a  kind  of 
juridical  power  vested  in  synods,  though  he  had 
just  asserted  that  there  was  none.  The  framers  of 
the  Cambridge  Platform  certainly  held  that  they 
had  no  such  power ;  for  they  speak  ^  of  the  third 
way  of  communion,  by  way  of  admonition,  and  of 
non-communion  with  the  erring  members  only 
and  ^  they  expressly  deny  juridical  authority  to  sy- 
nods also.  In  1744  an  instance  of  such  discipline 
occurred  in  the  case  of  the  First  Church  in  Glouces- 
ter V.  the  Second  Church  in  Bradford.^  The  church 
in  Bradford  admitted  the  right  thus  to  discipline, 
but  denied  being  obnoxious  in  the  case  at  issue. 
The  defendants  triumphed.^^  Samuel  Mather" 
recognizes  this  right  of  disciplining  and  withdraw- 
ing communion  from  other  churches,  and  says  that 
it  is  thus  that  Congregational  churches  can  be  dis- 
tinguished from  Brownistical.  (It  probably  cannot, 
however,  be  made  to  appear  that  either  Brown  or 
his  immediate  followers  denied  this  right  of  disci- 
plining by  non-communion.  See  Brownists.  See 
also  Punchard's  History,  248.)  Cotton  Mather'^ 
describes  the  details  of  a  method  of  procedure  in 
such  cases.  He  cites  ^^  the  single  instance  in  which 
the  churches  represented  in  council  proceeded  thus 
to  withdraw  communion.  The  Answer  of  the 
New  England  Elders  to  the  Nine  Positions^*  re- 
cognizes the  power  of  the  churches  to  withdraw 
communion  from  a  church  which  should  unjustly 
7 


74  CHURCHES, 

persist  in  deposing  its  minister.  Burton"  shows 
the  manner  in  which  this  is  done,  and  "  a  brotherly 
account  required,  without  selling  over  the  liberty 
of  each  church  to  others,  so  that  it  ceases  to  be  a 
free  church  of  Christ  under  his  only  jurisdiction." 
The  Independents  in  the  Westminister  Assembly  ^^ 
maintain  the  same  doctrine.  Dr.  Eckley^^  shows 
that,  in  case .  churches  abuse  their  liberty,  other 
churches  may  withdraw  communion  from  them  ; 
which,  however,  should  be  done  with  great  caution. 
In  the  official  narrative  of  the  proceedings  of  an 
ecclesiastical  council  convened  in  Salem  in  1734,  it 
appears  ^^  that  the  council  assembled  on  the  20th 
of  July,  and  sent  a  "  Letter  of  Solemn  Advice  "  to 
the  church,  threatening  them  with  non-communion 
unless  they  complied;  and  adjourned  to  the  15th 
of  October  to  give  them  time.  The  council,  re- 
assembled,^^ executed  their  threatening,  still  giving 
a  probation  of  three  months,  and  wrote  to  the 
churches  in  the  Commonwealth  to  sustain  them. 
(See  Felt's  Annals  of  Salem,  ii.  594,  595.)  The 
pamphlets  on  this  controversy  fill  a  whole  volume. 
Mr.  Fiske  the  minister,  and  a  majority  of  his  church, 
did  not  approve  of  this  "  third  way  of  communion  ; " 
disregarded  the  sentence,  and  outlived  the  storm. 
(See  Council  expires  when^  8fC.)  President  Stiles  ^° 
says :  "  No  church  was  hereticated  for  not  receiving 
the  result  of  a  synod." —  See  Upham,  Rat.  Dis.  177, 
209;  Punchard,  View,  116,  185;  both  sustaining 
and  describing  the  same  course.  —  See  Churches 
subject  to  no  external  jurisdiction;  Discipline  of  one 
church  by  another* 


CHURCHES.  75 

»  Church.  Gov.  4.  *  lb.  149.  'lb.  204— 211.  *  lb,  234.  »  In 
Han.  ii.  226,  227.  ^  Page  100.  '  Chap.  xv.  *  Chap.  xvi.  sect.  4. 
'  Letters  of  First  Church  in  Gloucester  to  the  Second  Church  in 
Bradford.  '°  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  41,  42.  "  Apology,  134,  141. 
»2Ilat.  Dis.  162,  172.  ''lb.  161.  »<  In  Han.  ii.  38.  »Ub.  396. 
>«  lb.  509.  »7  Dudlean  Lect.  17.  *»  Pages  66,  67.  '^  lb.  90,  92. 
^'  Convention  Sermon,  60,  61. 

CHURCHES,  objects  o/.  —  Owen/  in  his  Original 
of  Churches,  chap,  iv.,  lays  it  down  as  the  main 
object  of  churches  to  subject  our  souls  to  Christ's 
authority,  that  they  may  be  taught  what  he  com- 
mands, and  for  the  joint  celebration  of  the  ordi- 
nances of  the  gospel. 

»  Works,  XX.  114,  115. 

CHURCHES,  all  Christians  may  establish.  — 
Goodwin  argues  this  largely  in  his  Church  Govern- 
ment, showing*  that  otherwise  many  true  Christians 
must  ever  remain  out  of  the  church  of  God.  The 
same  we  have  seen  to  have  been  the  opinion  of 
John  Robinson.'  Increase  Mather,  on  the  contrary,' 
maintains  that  it  is  indispensable  to  the  establish- 
ment of  these  churches,  that  a  consociation  be 
formed,  with  power  to  disown  all  new  churches  not 
constituted  by  neighbor  churches.  This  was  in  a 
work  of  his  somewhat  advanced  age ;  and  none 
conversant  with  their  history  and  works  can  fail  to 
see  that  the  son  guided  the  father's  hand  in  com- 
posing this  work. —  See  Elders;  Presbytery, 
c]ii{i'ch  has  poiver  over  it.  See  also  the  next  article 
but  one,  viz.  Churches  begun  without  officers^  SfC. 

'  Pages  256—262.  '  See  Church,  tohcU  constitutea  ?  '  Disqui- 
sition on  Ecclesiastical  Councils,  34. 


76  CHURCHES. 

CHURCHES,  the  seat  of  all  power  necessary  to 
church  acts.  —  So  declares  the  Savoy  Confession.^ 
It  affirms^  that  the  churches  receive  this  power 
immediately  from  Christ  himself.  But  Increase 
Mather,  and  some  of  the  New  England  divines, 
who  were  striving  for  consociation  and  the  veto 
power  of  ministers,  maintained  that  there  could  not 
be  a  valid  church  act  without  the  consent  of  the 
elders,  as  well  as  the  brethren.^  Dr.  Mather  strives 
to  make  out  that  this  is  a  dividing  point  between 
Congregationalism  and  Brownism ;  but  both  the 
Savoy  Conference  and  the  Cambridge  Synod  main- 
tained the  reverse.  Prince  *  records  this  among  the 
principles  of  John  Kobinson's  church,  "  that  any 
competent  number  of  saints  have  a  right  to  embody 
into  a  church  for  mutual  edification."  Dr.  Wisner  * 
states,  that  those  opposed  to  Mr.  Davenport,  in  the 
First  Church  in  Boston,  who  made  application  for 
a  dismission,  when  refused,  proceeded  to  organize 
themselves  into  a  church,  according  to  the  advice  of 
council.  Dr.  Wisner  deprecates  the  triumph  of  a 
wrong  theology  in  this  new  organization,  but  says 
that  "  it  is  to  be  rejoiced  in  as  confirming  the  rights 
of  those  who  had  been  deprived  of  them." 

*  Art.  iv.,  V.  in  Han.  iii.  5i5,  ^  lb.  ^  Dis.  Ecc.  Councils,  Pref. 
iv.    •*  Chronology,  91.    ^  Hist.  Old  South  Church,  Boston,  8,  10. 

CHURCHES  begun  without  officers,  and  may  con- 
tinue without  them,  and  act  despite  of  them.  —  John 
Robinson  says  :  ^  "  "Whence  it  foUoweth,  that  both 
church  matters,  yea,  and  churches  also,  may,  and  in 
some  cases  77iustj  be  begun  without  officers;  yea, 


CHURCHES.  77 

even  where  officers  are,  if  they  fail  to  do  their  duties, 
the  people  may  enterprise  viatters  needful,  howsoever 
you  will  have  the  minister  the  only  primum  movenSy 
and  will  tie  all  to  his  fingers."  Hooker  ^  says :  "  A 
church,  as  iotum  essenliale,  is  and  may  be  before 
the  officers."  He  shows  ^  that  churches  have  the 
power  of  admitting  new  members,  of  the  choice  of 
officers,  and,  in  case  the  officer  is  heretical  and 
absolutely  wicked,  of  rejecting  him  and  making  him 
no  officer.  A  church  is  before  its  officers.  He  main- 
tains, however,*  that  a  church  is  incomplete  with- 
out its  officers.  Owen*  shows  that  a  church  is 
before  its  officers,  and  bishops  are  not  necessary  to 
gather  it,  nor  ordination  necessary  to  it ;  for,  other- 
wise, "  one  proud  sensual  beast,"  ordained  in  the 
succession,  "  has  more  power  than  the  most  holy 
church  on  the  earth."  Cambridge  Platform,^  though 
it  recognises  a  power  of  office,  yet  declares  that  the 
church  have  power  of  privilege,  and  may  designate 
the  persons  to  office ;  and  ^  it  recognizes  the  power 
as  vested  in  them ;  "  it  being  natural  to  all  bodies, 
and  so  to  a  church  body,  to  be  furnished  with  suffi- 
cient power  for  its  own  preservation  and  subsist- 
ence." The  right  of  the  negative  vote  is,  however, 
asserted  by  Higginson  and  Hubbard,  in  the  Post- 
script to  their  Testimony  to  the  Order  of  the  Gos- 
pel in  the  Churches  of  New  England.  But  it  has 
been  rather  rarely  claimed  by  pastors  or  elders,  and 
generally  resisted  by  the  people  since  that  time. 
Cambridge  Platform  ^  also  affirms,  that,  in  cases  of 
mal-administration,  the  elders  are  subject  to  the 
power  of  the  church.     Isaac  Chauncy  ^  shows  that 


78  ^        CHURCHES. 

a  church  must  be  constituted  before  it  can  choose 
a  pastor.  A  church  is  empowered  from  Christ  to 
choose  its  own  ministerial  officers,  "  before  such  a 
church  hath  elders  or  deacons.  These  are  plain 
from  the  nature  of  a  body  corporate."  —  See  various 
documents  concerning  troubles  in  the  Sou.  Church 
in  Reading,  about  1846 ;  Adams,  Zabdiel,  in  Eliot, 
Biog.  Diet. ;  Hist,  of  Sterling,  in  Worcester  Mag. 
vol.  ii.  for  1826  ;  also  Zabdiel  Adams,  Answer  to 
Treatise  on  Church  Government.  See  also  Pas- 
tors, have  they  a  negative  vote  in  the  church? 
Church,  ministers  not  necessary  to  constitute  ;  Pow- 
er, churchy  installed  in  ministry  or  brethren  ? 

*  Reply  to  Bernard,  in  Han.  i.  212 ;  and  "Works,  ii.  148.  ^  Pre- 
face to  his  Survey.  ^  Survey,  part  i.  10 — 93.  ^  Part  ii.  2.  *  Ori- 
ginal of  Churches,  chap.  iii. ;  "Works,  xx.  108 — 110.  ^  Chap.  v. 
sect.  2.  ''  Chap.  x.  sect.  2.  ^  Chap.  x.  sect.  7.  ^  Divine  Inst. 
Cong.  Churches,  49,  50. 

CHURCHES,  censures^  admissions^  and  all  ordi- 
nary matters  of^  in  the  people.  —  This  has  been  the 
doctrine  of  all  Congregationalists,  so  far  as  the 
primary  decisions  of  the  churches  are  concerned. 
The  whole  doctrine  of  authoritative  appeals  to 
councils  or  to  consociations  places  the  power  some- 
where else.  Strict  Congregationalists  have  always 
placed  it  in  the  whole  brotherhood.  The  twenty- 
fourth  article  of  the  Confession  of  the  Low  Country 
Exiles  says :  ^  "  Christ  has  given  the  power  to 
receive  in  or  cast  off  any  member  to  the  whole 
body  of  every  Christian  congregation,  and  not  to 
any  one  member  or  more  members,  ...  or  any  other 
congregation  to  do  it  for  them ;  yet  so  as  that  each 


CHURCHES.  79 

congregation  ought  to  use  the  best  help  they  can 
hereunto,  and  the  most  meet  member  they  have  to 
pronounce  the  same  in  the  public  assembly."  Tht> 
Savoy  Confession  says :  ^  "  Every  church  hath 
power  in  itself  to  exercise  and  execute  all  those 
censures  appointed  by  him  in  the  way  and  orde 
prescribed  in  the  gospel."  Cambridge  Platform^ 
says  :  "  The  whole  church  hath  power  to  proceed 
to  the  censure  of  the  offending  member,  whether 
by  admonition  or  excommunication."  In  the  Direc- 
tory of  Church  Government  of  the  Puritans  in  the 
reign  of  Elizabeth,"*  it  is  asserted  that  "  for  all  the 
greater  affairs  of  the  church,  as  in  excommunica- 
tion of  any,  and  choosing  and  deposing  of  church 
ministers,  nothing  may  be  concluded  without  the 
consent  of  the  church."  So  of  admissions,  the 
Savoy  Confession  says :  *  "  Nor  may  any  person 
be  added  to  the  church,  as  a  private  member,  but 
by  consent  of  the  church."  So,  too,  of  all  the 
common  affairs  of  the  church,  Congregationalists 
maintain  that  all  the  brotherhood  are  to  act  in 
them.  Ainsworth  ^  enumerates  a  list  of  these  com- 
mon affairs,  in  which  the  primitive  and  apostolical 
churches  engaged.  Hooker^  also  enumerates  a 
number  of  such  things,  which  churches  have  cer- 
tainly the  power  to  do.  Samuel  Mather '  shows 
that  the  whole  church  have  power  to  act,  as  they 
did  in  the  apostolic  times,  in  the  establishment  of 
the  order  of  deacons,  assisting  in  their  ordination, 
and  directing  concerning  the  circumstances  of  the 
Gentile  converts,  &c.  —  See  Churches,  the  seat  of 
all  power  necessary  to  church  acts. 


80  CHURCHES. 

*  Han.  i.  95.  '  Art.  xviii.  of  Discipline,  in  Han.  iii.  647. 
3  Chap.  X.  sect.  5.  *  In  Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  440.  ^  In  ib.  179. 
®  Communion  of  Churches,  in  Han.  i.  282.  '  Survey,  part.  i.  193. 
•*  Preface  to  Apology. 

CHURCHES,  their  members  have  equal  rights, — 
This  has  always  been  the  doctrine  of  strict  Congre- 
gationalists.  It  was  maintained  by  the  ancient 
Waldenses/  "  that  none  in  the  church  ought  to  be 
greater  than  their  brethren."  The  Leyden  Church ' 
maintained  the  same.  The  Answer  (Burton's)  to 
Prynne's  Full  Reply '  declares  it  to  be  the  law  of 
nature  for  every  one  to  join  in  such  a  society,  where 
every  man  may  have  his  own  personal  vote  in 
every  thing  which  concerns  him.  (No  wonder  that 
Prynne  accused  him  of  sentiments  adverse  to  mo- 
narchy.) In  the  State  of  the  Kingdom  Stated  *  is 
shown  the  evils  which  obtain  where  this  principle 
is  discarded,  and  where  negative  votes,  with  veto 
power  in  members,  are  admitted. 

» In  Punchard's  Hist.  105.  '  Ib.  336.  ^  Page  23.  *  In  Han. 
iii.  234. 

CHURCHES,  equal  and  independent  of  each  other, 
—  Bradshaw*  says*.  "Churches  are  in  all  ecclesi- 
astical matters  equal ;  .  .  .  Christ  has  not  subjected 
any  church  or  congregation  to  any  other  superior 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  than  to  that  which  is 
within  itself ;  so  that,  if  a  whole  church  or  congre- 
gation should  err  in  any  matters  of  faith  or  worship, 
no  churches  or  spiritual  officers  have  power  to  cen- 
sure or  punish  them,  but  are  only  to  counsel  and 
advise  them."     The   Nonconformist   Directory  of 


CHURCHES.  81 

Elizabeth's  reign  *  says  :  "  Of  all  particular  churches 
there  is  one  and  the  same  right,  order,  and  form ; 
therefore  none  may  challenge  to  itself  power  over 
others."  John  Cook  (Cromwell's  principal  Secre- 
tary) ^  holds  "  a  subordination  of  officers  in  the 
same  church,  but  an  equality  in  the  several  congre- 
gations, which,  as  sisters,  depend  not  upon  one 
another,  but  are  helpful  to  one  another ;  .  .  .  not 
excepting  against  consultative,  persuasive,  and  de- 
liberative synods,  but  the  ruling  synod  that  shall 
command  any  thing  imperio  voluntatisJ^  Mather, 
in  his  Answer  to  Rutherford,*  argues  that  churches 
are  all  equal  and  independent.  —  See  Churches 
discipline  each  other,  but  not  juridically  ;  subject  to  no 
external  jurisdiction;  Councils;  Consociation. 

^  English  Puritanism,  chap.  ii.  sect.  2,  3,  in  Neal's  Puritans, 
i.  248.  '^  lb.  ii.  440.  ^  What  the  Independents  -would  Have,  in 
Han.  iii.  251.    "  lb.  ii.  184. 

CHURCHES,  what  ones  we  should  not  join. — 
Owen  ^  maintains  that  though  the  members  of  the 
ancient  churches  were  of  one  mind,  so  far  as  was 
necessary  to  joint  communion,  yet  they  differed 
about  some  doctrines.  He  shows  that  Christians 
ought  not  to  join  any  church  where  any  fundamen- 
tal article  of  faith  is  rejected  or  corrupted,  nor 
where  any  fundamental  doctrine  of  religious  wor- 
ship, church  order,  or  the  gospel  ministry,  is  per- 
verted.—  See  Creeds;  Catholicism;  Confessions 
OF  Faith  ;  Separation  ;  Schism  ;  Churches,  what 
ones  we  should  separate  from, 

*  Original  of  Churches,  chap.  x. ;  Works,  xx.  202 — 204. 


82  CHURCHES. 

CHURCHES,  what  ones  we  should  separate  from. 
—  Goodwin  ^  lays  it  down  as  a  rule,  that  when  to 
the  enjoying  of  ordinances  any  thing  must  be  prac- 
tised which  is  sinful,  or  where  by  continuing  a 
member  he  must  tolerate  what  he  is  bound  not 
to  tolerate,  that  from  such  a  church  he  is  bound  to 
separate,  though  he  might  not  consider  them  so 
corrupt  but  that  he  might  occasionally  commune 
with  them,  while  he  had  no  responsibility  as  to 
tolerating  the  evils  which  were  retained  in  it.  He 
evidently  had  his  eye,  in  the  first  instance,  to  kneel- 
ing at  the  communion,  which  many  considered  as 
adoration  of  the  emblems;  and,  in  the  second,  to 
churches  practising  mixed  communion  with  those 
who  did  not  profess  experimental  religion.  The 
twelfth  chapter  of  his  seventh  book  is  devoted  to 
showing,  that  such  separation  for  conscience'  sake 
ought  to  be  allowed.  The  Savoy  Declaration  ^ 
maintains  the  same  doctrine.  —  See  Churches,  what 
ones  we  should  not  join;  Separation,  Schism. 

*  Church  Gov.  261.  ^  On  Discipline,  art.  xxviii.  in  Han.  iii. 
£48. 


CHURCHES,  how  they  should  proceed  towards  a 
disorderly  member  of  another  church. — John  Cotton* 
argues  that  they  should  complain  to  the  church  of 
which  the  offender  is  a  member.  If  they  neglect, 
call  a  council ;  and,  if  the  church  still  persist  in  ob- 
stinacy, withdraw  communion  from  them  till  they 
acknowledge  their  transgression. 

*  Way  of  the  Churches,  61. 


CHURCHES.  83 

CHURCHES,  proper  proceedings  when  their  pas- 
tors offend. —  Cambridge  Platform  ^  directs  that  the 
church  first  remove  him  from  office  (by  council 
where  it  may  be  had),  and  then,  if  need  be,  deal 
with  him,  and  cast  him  out  as  any  other  member. 
Cotton  Mather  ^  lays  down  the  details  of  a  proper 
process  (with  council)  in  such  a  case.  —  See  Disci- 
pline, mode  of;  Minister, /i02/^  deposed;  Pastor,- 
censurable  by  his  church  ;  a  member  of  his  church. 
^  Chap.  X.  sect.  6.    =  Rat.  Dis.  162—167. 

CHURCHES  should  assist  their  feeble  sisters. — 
Cambridge  Platform  ^  recognizes  the  duty  of  the 
more  able  of  the  churches  to  assist  the  weaker  ones, 
founded  on  the  Scripture  example  of  the  Gentile 
churches  sending  succor  to  the  poor  Christians  at 
Jerusalem,  and  from  various  portions  of  Scripture. 
The  Congregationalists  have  always  been  distin- 
guished for  their  missionary  spirit 
*  Chap.  XV.  sect.  2. 

CHURCHES,  early  liberality  of  New  England.  — 
Dr.  Ware,  History  of  Old  North  and  New  Brick 
Churches,  Boston,^  informs  us,  that  in  1726  a  church 
in  Boston  contributed  sixty  pounds  for  the  propa- 
gation of  the  gospel,  and  that  all  the  churches  in 
Boston  contributed  ten  thousand  two  hundred  and 
seventy-three  pounds  for  the  sufierers  by  the  fire  in 
1760.  Probably  more  was  done  formerly,  in  pro- 
portion to  the  means,  for  the  spread  and  support  of 
the  gospel,  than  at  present. 

»  Page  50. 


84  committee's  church. 

See  further  on  the  general  subject  of  churches 
under  the  heads,  Discipline,  Dismission,  Members. 

COLLECTIONS,  r^eeA:/?/.  —  These  were  practised 
by  some  of  the  churches  in  Cotton  Mather's  time,* 
who  supposed  them  required  in  2  Cor.  xvi.  2.  Out 
li  these  their  church  expenses  were  paid  or  assisted. 
Some  moderns  are  beginning  to  revive  the  doctrine 
as  applicable  to  charitable  objects.  This  passage, 
however,  is  more  generally  considered  as  of  special 
application. —  See  Gifts  and  Offerings,  weekly. 

» Rat.  Dis.  62. 

COMMENTARIES.  —  John  Robinson  '  says  : 
"  The  simple  necessity  of  commentaries  and  inter- 
pretations, which  God  requires  for  becoming  an 
ordinary  prophet,  I  dare  not  acknowledge.  Of 
great  use  are  they,  but  not  of  simple  necessity.  The 
prerogative  of  simple  necessity  I  would  challenge 
as  peculiar  to  the  Holy  Scriptures."  One  of  the 
Genevan  Disputants  argues  *  that  "  men  do  diverse- 
ly offend,  as  they,  on  the  one  hand,  slight  God's 
gifts  to  the  fathers ;  and,  on  the  other,  receive  their 
comments  without  comparing  them  with  the  word 
of  God." 

'  People's  Plea  for  Prophecy,  v.  Yates,  in  Han.  i.  355 ;  and 
Works,  iii.  298,  299.     ^  Page  160. 

COMMITTEE'S  CHURCH.  —  See  Church,  offi- 
cers of;  Officers,  what  ?  God^s  gift,  and  not  to  be 
multiplied  at  discretion]  Power,  church,  cannot  be 
given  away  nor  delegated;  Standing  Committees. 


COMMUNION.  85 

COMMUNION,  terms  of.  —  John  Howe  *  says  : 
"  Suppose  you  judge  concurrence  .in  the  use  of  a 
liturgy  a  sin,  and  the  unprescribed  way  a  duty,  yet 
who  hath  empowered  you  to  make  such  sins  exclu- 
sive from  Christian  communion  ?  .  .  .  Hath  God  for- 
bidden any  to  be  admitted  to  Christian  communion, 
but  such  as  are  absolutely  perfect  in  knowledge  and 
holiness  ?"  In  his  preface  to  Carnality  of  Religious 
Contentions,^  he  says,  "  Whose  is  this  table  ?  Is  it 
the  table  of  this  or  that  man,  or  party  of  men  ?  or 
is  it  the  Lord's  table  ?  Then  certainly  it  ought  to 
be  free  to  his  guests ;  and  who  should  dare  invite 
others,  or  forbid  these  ?  "  In  his  Sermon  concern- 
ing Union  among  Protestants,  he  says :  ^  "To  do 
any  thing  against  the  preponderating  influence  of 
my  own  judgment  and  conscience  were  great 
wickedness,  and  would  unfit  me  for  any  commu- 
nion whatever."  This  he  applies  against  making 
terms  of  communion  to  which  all  Christians  cannot 
conscientiously  accede.  In  his  Peace  God's  Bless- 
ing, he  says,*  "  We  are  expressly  required  to  receive 
one  another  (which  cannot  but  mean  to  one  an- 
other's communion),  and  that  not  to  doubtful  dispu- 
tations." Robert  Hall  argues  the  doctrine  of  open 
communion  in  a  most  masterly  manner  in  his 
Terms  of  Communion,  and  his  Replies  to  King- 
horn  and  to  Fuller.  He  sums  up  his  arguments 
for  the  doctrine  *  as  follows :  "  We  have  endeavored 
to  show,  that  the  practice  of  strict  communion  de- 
rives no  support  from  the  supposed  priority  of  bap- 
tism to  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  the  order  of  the  insti- 
tution, which  is  exactly  the  reverse ;  that  it  is  not 


86  COMMUNION. 

countenanced  bj  the  tenor  of  the  apostles'  com- 
mission, nor  by  apostolic  precedent,  the  spirit  of 
which  is  in  our  favor;  that  the  opposite  practice  is 
enforced  by  the  obligations  of  Christian  charity* 
that  it  is  indubitably  comprehended  in  the  canon 
which  enjoins  forbearance  towards  mistaken  bre- 
thren ;  that  the  system  of  our  opponents  unchurches 
every  Pedobaptist  community;  that  it  rests  on  no 
general  principle ;  attempts  to  establish  an  impos- 
sible medium ;  inflicts  a  punishment  which  is  ca- 
pricious and  unjust;  and  finally,  that,  by  fomenting 
prejudice  and  precluding  the  most  effectual  means 
of  conviction,  it  defeats  its  own  purpose."  See 
also,  for  his  most  convincing  remarks,  vol.  i.  403, 
437 ;  and  ii.  210.  His  arguments  for  open  com- 
munion are  very  replete,  and  should  be  studied  by 
all  who  inquire  what  the  Lord  would  have  them 
to  do.  —  See  Baptism,  is  it  indispensable  to  commu- 
nion? Creeds. 

»  Works,  184.  «  lb.  457.  ^  lb.  480.  lb.  931.  -  *  Works, 
i.  359. 

COMMUNION,  occasional,  should  be  open.  —  The 
Savoy  Confession  shows,^  "  That  churches,  consist- 
ing of  persons  sound  in  the  faith,  and  of  a  good 
conversation,  ought  not  to  refuse  communion  with 
each  other,  though  they  walk  not  in  all  things  ac- 
cording to  the  same  rule  of  church  order ;  and  if 
they  judge  other  churches  to  be  true  churches, 
though  less  pure,  they  may  receive  to  occasional 
communion  such  members  of  these  churches  as  are 
credibly  testified  to  be  godly  and  to  live  without 


COMMUNION.  87 

offence."  Ainsworth,  Answer  to  Paget,  says :  * 
"  Those  that  are  worthy  to  be  received  into  the 
true  visible  church,  .  .  .  with  them  I  hold  it  to  be 
lawful  to  have  private  communion."  Robinson, 
in  his  Apology,^  says :  "  Touching  the  reformed 
churches,  we  account  them  true  churches  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  both  profess  and  practise  communion 
with  them.  .  .  .  The  sacraments  we  do  administer 
to  their  members,  if,  by  occasion,  any  of  them  be 
present  with  us."  The  Independents,  in  their  An- 
swer to  the  Grand  Committee  in  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  are  equally  explicit  on  this  point.*  Cam- 
bridge Platform,^  Hooker's  Survey,^  and  Watts's 
Terms  of  Communion,  quest,  xi.'^  recognize  the 
same  doctrine  ;  though  Watts  is  less  catholic  than 
Congregationalists  in  general,  of  his  day,  on  the 
question, —  Whether  all  good  Christians  should  be 
received  as  members  of  the  churches  ?  Taylor,  in 
his  Vindication  of  Dissenters,^  shows  that  a  Chris- 
tian is  obliged  to  hold  "  occasional  communion, 
unless  he  may  live  like  a  heathen  a  year  where  he 
sojourns."  R.  Hall,  in  his  Terms  of  Communion,^ 
handles  the  argument  for  such  open  communion  in 
an  irrefutable  manner.^'^  He  asserts  that  no  trace 
of  the  doctrine  of  close  communion  can  be  found 
among  the  ancient  Waldensian  Baptists.  —  See 
Creeds  ;  Catholicism  of  Congregational  churches. 

» In  Neal,  Puritans,  ii.  179.  =  i^  Han.  i.  338.  » lb.  372. 
*  lb.  iii.  50.  ^  Chap.  xv.  sect.  2.  «  Part  i.  295.  '  Works,  iii.  285. 
8  Page  75.    »  Works,  i.  292—321.     »"  lb.  354. 

COMMUNION,  occasional^  introduction  to,  —  Cot- 


88  COMMUNION. 

ton  Mather  *  says :  "  The  pastor  having  first  men- 
tioned the  names  of  the  persons  belonging  to  other 
churches,  who  request  a  part  in  the  present  com- 
munion, he  then  addresses  himself,  with  all  possible 
solemnity,  to  the  celebration."  The  more  usual 
method  now  is  to  invite  the  members  in  good  stand- 
ing of  all  churches,  leaving  it  to  the  consciences  of 
the  strangers  to  decide  whether  they  are  such  as 
the  inviting  church  intends  to  fellowship  as  Chris- 
tians. 

1  Rat.  Dis.  97. 

COMMUNION,  true^  exists  just  in  proportion  to 
purity,  —  Goodwin  is  very  explicit  on  this  point, 
laboring  it  at  large  in  his  fifth  Book  on  Church 
Government.^  Hetherington,  a  Presbyterian  writer, 
says :  ^  "  The  Independents  did  not,  like  the  Brown- 
ists,  condemn  every  other  church  as  too  corrupt 
and  antichristian  for  intercommunion."  Robinson, 
in  his  Apology,  says :  ^  "  Our  faith  is  not  negative, 
.  .  .  nor  which  consists  in  condemning  others,  and 
wiping  their  names  out  of  the  bead-roll  of  churches ; 
.  .  .  neither  require  we  of  any  of  ours,  in  the  confes- 
sion of  their  faith,  that  they  either  renounce,  or 
in  one  word  contest  with  the  church  of  England, 

WHATSOEVER  THE  WORLD  CLAMORS  OF  US  THIS  WAY." 

The  Westminster  Assembly  Independents  say,  in 
their  Apologetical  Narrative  :  *  "  We  always  have 
professed  that  we  both  did  and  would  hold  commu- 
nion with  the  churches  of  England  as  the  churches 
of  Christ.  ...  It  never  entered  our  minds  to  judge 
them  as  antichristian."  Jacob,  in  his  Declaration, 
says :  *  "  For  my  part  I  never  was  nor  am  separated 


CONFERENCES.  89 

from  all  public  communion  with  the  congregations 
of  England."  Robert  Hall  maintains  the  same 
doctrine  ^  from  the  injunction  to  receive  him  that  is 
weak  in  faith.  And  he  says/  "  Placing  Pedobap- 
tists,  who  form  the  great  body  of  the  faithful,  on 
the  same  level  with  men  of  impure  and  vicious 
lives,  is  equally  repugnant  to  reason  and  offensive 
to  charity."  —  See  Catholicism. 

»  Pages  222—237.  ^  Neal,  Puritans,  i.  489.  ^  Han.  i.  384 ;  and 
Works,  iii.  63.  "15.11.223,224.  ^  lb.  1.230.  «  Vol.  1.326.  'lb.  331. 

CONFERENCE  meetings.  — T.  Goodwin^  main- 
tains the  duty  of  all  members  of  churches  to  learn 
each  other's  spiritual  state,  not  merely  privately, 
but  in  the  churches.  This  privilege  has  generally 
been  maintained  among  Congregationalists,  though 
some  have  endeavored  to  confine  this  work  to 
ministers.  Upham,  in  his  Ratio  Disciplinae,  says  : ' 
"  Private  meetings  of  Christians  are  kept  up,  as  in 
former  times ;  nor  can  it  be  otherwise,  so  long  as 
the  true  Congregational  spirit  remains."  He  quotes 
Cotton  Mather,  Rat.  Dis.  art.  x. ;  "  It  is  usual 
among  us  for  Christians  to  hold  private  meetings, 
wherein  they  do  with  various  exercises  edify  one 
another."  He  (Cotton  Mather)  proceeds  to  describe 
the  method  in  which  these  conference  meetings 
were  conducted. —  See  Prophesying. 

Ch.  Gov.  298—303.     *  Pages  252,  253. 

CONFERENCES  of  churches.  — Vpham  devotes 
the  twenty-third  chapter  of  his  Ratio  DisciplinsB  * 
to  a  description  of  these,  as  they  now  exist  in  vari- 


90  CONFESSIONS   OF  FAITH. 

ous  portions  of  New  England.  He  traces  the  plans 
for  establishing  them  back  to  the  synod  of  1662, 
and  even  to  John  Cotton,  who  drew  up  a  plan  for 
such  conferences  near  the  time  of  his  death,  which 
may  be  found  in  Increase  Mather's  First  Principles 
of  New  England.  Upham  shows  at  length  the 
objects,  method,  and  benefits  of  such  church  con- 
ferences. 

1  Pages  240—249. 

CONFESSIONS  OF  FAlTR.their  use  and  abuse. 
The  Preface  to  the  Savoy  Confession  ^  says  :  "  Con- 
fessions, when  made  by  a  company  of  professors  of 
Christianity,  jointly  meeting  to  that  end,  .  .  .  the 
most  genuine  and  natural  use  of  such  is,  that,  under 
the  form  of  words,  they  express  the  substance  of 
the  same  common  salvation.  .  .  .  And,  accordingly, 
such  a  transaction  is  to  be  looked  upon  but  as  a 
meet  or  fit  medium  whereby  to  express  that  their 
common  faith  and  salvation,  and  in  no  way  to  be 
made  use  of  as  an  imposition  upon  any.  What- 
ever is  of  force  or  constraint,  in  matters  of  this  na- 
ture, causeth  them  to  degenerate  from  the  name  and 
nature  of  confessions^  and  turns  them  from  being 
confessions  of  faith  into  impositions  and  exactions  of 
faith;  .  .  .  there  being  nothing  that  tends  more  to 
heighten  dissensions  among  brethren  than  to  deter- 
mine and  adopt  the  matter  of  their  difference  under 
so  high  a  title  as  to  be  an  article  of  our  faith." 
Upham  ^  maintains  that  churches  "  have  a  right  to 
say  on  what  conditions  others,  either  individuals  or 
bodies  of  men,  shall  share  their  fellowship ; "  saying, 


CONGREGATIONAL  CHURCHES.  91 

"  They  can  enter  into  fellowship  with  others  with 
whose  principles  they  more  nearly  agree."  This 
reasoning  seems  to  hold  only  on  the  supposition 
that  churches  are  strictly  voluntary,  in  distinction 
from  divinely  instituted,  bodies.  If  churches  are  of 
divine  institution,  then  all  true  Christians  have  a 
right  to  share  in  them  all  the  privileges  of  the  sons 
of  God.  It  is  their  Father's  table  and  their  Fa- 
ther's church ;  and  what  right  have  their  brethren 
to  debar  them  ?  —  See  Creeds. 

» In  Han.  iii.  517—528.     ^  Rat.  Dis.  57. 

CONFESSION  of  secret  5/w. —' Increase  Mather 
says  ^  that  some  secret  sins  "  ought  not  to  be  made 
public"  by  him  who  has  committed  them. 

>  Order  of  N.  E.  Churches  Justified,  30. 

CONFESSION  for  sin, —  See  Repentance,  how 
manifested. 

CONFUSED  RECORDS,  how  to  he  interpreted. 
In  the  Answer  to  the  Hampshire  Narrative,^  we 
find  that  an  ambiguous  passage  on  the  church  re- 
cords was  interpreted  by  taking  the  sense  of  the 
church,  when  re-assembled,  as  to  what  should  have 
been  recorded. 

»  Page  43. 

CONGREGATIONAL  CHURCHES,  early  his- 
tory  of  —  Congregationalists  maintain  that  the 
primitive  apostolical  churches  were  all  Congrega- 
tional.    This  was  admitted  even  by  their  opposers 


92  CONGREGATIONAL   CHURCHES. 

in  the  early  days  of  the  controversy.  Archbishop 
"Whitgift  asserts^  that  "the  state  of  the  church 
was  popular  in  the  apostles'  time."  (See  Churches, 
primitive,  ivere  Congregational ;  and  Corruptions 
of  primitive  churches.)  In  the  early  days  of  the 
reformation,  Wickliffe  advocated  most  of  the  essen- 
tial doctrines  of  the  Congregational  polity.^  The 
sufficiency  of  the  Scriptures,  the  constitution  of  the 
church  of  visible  saints,  the  liberty  of  the  form  of 
worship,  and  the  two  orders  of  officers,  were  the 
prime  articles  of  his  ecclesiastical  creed.'  In  1550, 
John  Alasco,  or  a  Lasco,  a  Polish  nobleman,  gath- 
ered a  church  of  German  refugees  in  London,  and 
advocated  most  of  the  doctrines  of  Congregation- 
alism. He  proceeded  under  the  great  seal  of  King 
Edward  VI.  "out  of  his  great  desire  to  settle  a  like 
reformation  in  the  English  churches."  *  His  church 
was  scattered,  and  he  banished,  by  the  bloody 
Mary.  He  returned  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  but 
could  not  get  his  former  privileges  confirmed,  though 
she  permitted  Grindal  to  be  the  superintendent  of 
his  church,  and  confirmed  its  charter.'*  But,  even 
in  Mary's  time,  we  are  assured  that  there  were 
many  Congregational  churches  meeting  secretly.^ 
And  "  no  church  but  such  as  was  substantially  con- 
gregational could  have  existed,  in  an  organized 
form,  during  the  terrible  persecutions  of  Mary's 
reign  ; "  ^  a  striking  indication  that  God  designed 
this  form  of  government  for  his  churches  in  their 
state  of  trial.  In  1554,  the  English  exiles,  with  Mr. 
Whittingham,  went  to  Frankfort,  and  established 
their  church,  July  29,  on  Congregational  principles, 


CONGREGATIONAL    CHURCHES.  93 

making  the  church  the  dernier  resort  in  all  contro- 
versies,—  chose  their  ministers  and  deacons,  omit- 
ting many  of  the  superstitions  in  the  Service-book 
of  Edward  VI.  Another  such  church  was  about 
this  time  set  up  at  Embden,  and  another  at  Wes- 
sel.^  The  history  of  the  Puritans  and  Noncon- 
formists of  Elizabeth's  and  the  succeeding  reigns 
are  too  well  known  to  need  a  further  description  in 
this  article.  Those  who  wish  to  examine  their 
history  in  detail  will  find  ample  material  in  Neal,' 
Prince,^''  Cotton  Mather,"  "Winthrop,^=^  Hubbard  ;^^ 
and,  among  the  moderns,  Punchard,^^  and  especially 
Hanbury,'*  who  has  done  a  great  work  and  a  good 
one.  Upham"  gives  a  succinct  account  of  the 
organization  of  Robinson's  church.  Prince  *^  in- 
forms us  that  in  1592  a  church  was  established  in 
London  ;  that  fifty-four  of  the  church  were  impri- 
soned, some  of  them  four  or  five  years.  They  were 
beat  with  cudgels,  and  many  died ;  and  Mr.  Green- 
wood, their  teacher,  was  executed,  and  the  rest 
banished  to  Amsterdam.  Their  Confession,  fre- 
quently referred  to  in  this  Dictionary,  was  first  pub- 
lished in  1596.  The  present  church  in  West  Barn- 
stable, Mass.,  is  supposed  to  be  the  oldest  Inde- 
pendent Congregational  church  in  the  world.  It 
was  organized  in  1616  in  England,  and  removed 
first  to  Scituate,  and  afterwards  to  Barnstable.^* 
Their  confession  of  faith  was  that,  frequently  al- 
luded to  in  this  work,  as  Jacob's  Church  Confes- 
sion. Eliot ^^  says:  "The  first  Congregational 
church  since  the  days  of  primitive  Christianity  wa3 
gathered  in  Geneva."  —  See  Separation. 


94  CONGREGATIONALISM. 

» In  Han.  i.  10.  '  Punchard,  Hist.  159—171.  '  lb.  *  Han. 
ii.  32—34.  ^  Neal,  Puritans,  i.  83.  ^  Punchard,  Hiat.  220—226. 
^  lb.  222.  «  Punchard's  Hist.  224,  225.  ^  Puritans.  ^^  Chro- 
nology. "  Magnalia.  ^^  Journal.  ^^  Hist.  Mass.  *"*  History. 
*^  Historical  Memorials.  ^^  Rat.  Dis.  40.  *^  Chronology,  235. 
»8  White,  Early  Hist.  N.  Eng.  260.  "  Ecc.  Hist.  Mass.  in  Mass. 
Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  vii.  267. 

CONGREGATIONALISM,  what?—lley\yn'  says 
of  Goodwin,  Nye,  Burroughs,  Bridge,  and  Simp- 
son :  "  These  men,  affecting  neither  the  severe  dis- 
cipline of  Presbytery,  nor  the  licentiousness  inci- 
dent to  Brownism,  embraced  Robinson's  model  of 
church  government  in  their  congregations,  consist- 
ing of  a  co-ordination  of  churches  for  their  mutual 
comfort,  and  not  a  subordination  of  one  to  the 
other  in  the  way  of  direction  or  command.  Cotton, 
Chauncy,  Hooker,  and  others,  he  alludes  to,  as 
advocating  the  same  views  in  the  New  England 
churches.  Punchard  ^  says  of  their  principles  : 
"  They  are  found  in  the  New  Testament,  and  their 
expounders  are  all  the  standard  writers  of  the  de- 
nomination, such  as  Johnson,  Ainsworth,  Robinson, 
and  Jacob,  Thos.  Hooker,  and  John  Cotton,  Owen, 
the  Mathers,  the  Authors  of  the  Cambridge  Plat- 
form, &c.  I  might  go  further  back  to  Penry  and 
Greenwood  and  Barrowe."  Eliot  ^  enumerates  the 
principal  things  in  which  Congregationalists  differ 
from  others:  1.  The  subject-matter  of  a  church, — 
saints  by  calling.  2.  Constitution  of  the  visible 
church,  —  a  covenant.  3.  Quantity  of  it,  —  as 
many  as  can  worship  in  one  place.  4.  A  denial 
of  any  jurisdiction  to  which  churches  are  subject. 
Hon.  S.  Haven  *  says :  "  The  essence  of  Congrega- 


CONGREGATIONALISM.  95 

tionalism  is,  that  all  the  power  is  in  and  proceeds 
from  the  individual  church.  She  elects  the  candi- 
date and  the  council,  and  issues  the  letters  missive  ; 
she  may  arrest  the  proceedings  in  any  stage  of 
them  ;  and^  in  the  very  last  stage^  is  called  to  signify 
whether  she  abide  her  determination.^^  Neal  says :  ^ 
"  Robinson  was  the  first  that  beat  out  a  middle 
track  between  Presbyterianism  and  Independency. 
He  allowed  the  expediency  of  synods  and  councils 
for  advice,  but  not  for  exercising  any  act  of  autho- 
rity or  jurisdiction."  —  See  next  article. 

*  la  Han.  ii.  40.  ^  View,  27.  ^  Ecc.  Hist.  Mass.  in  Mass. 
Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  ix.  13.  *  Proceedings  of  the  First 
Church,  and  Parish  in  Dedham,  64.     *  Hist.  N.  Eng.  i.  73. 

■  CONGREGATIONALISM,  epitome  of  principles 
of  —  Bartlett  ^  sums  these  up  :  Matter  of  a  visible 
church,  saints,  Rom.  i.  7 ;  1  Cor.  i.  2 ;  xiv.  33 ; 
Phi],  i.  1—7 ;  Col.  iii.  12 ;  1  Thess.  v.  27.  —  Form, 
uniting  together  in  one  spiritual  body  politic,  1  Cor. 
X.  17 ;  xii.  12,  20,  27 ;  Ephes.  ii.  22.  —  Quantity,  as 
many  as  can  meet  together  in  one  place.  Acts  ii.  1 ; 
V.  12 ;  xiv.  27 ;  1  Cor.  xiv.  23.  —  Power  of  govern- 
ment, in  itself.  Matt,  xviii.  17 — 19  ;  1  Cor.  v.  4 — 7, 
13;  Acts  XV.  22,  23;  Rev.  ii.  20.— Office  and  offi- 
cers, Ephes.  iv.  11,  12 ;  Rom.  xii.  6,  7 ;  1  Cor.  xii. 
28.  —  Choosing  officers,  by  the  whole  church,  Acts  i. 
15 — 26 ;  vi.  2,  3 ;  xiv.  23.  —  Admission  of  members, 
the  godly  and  their  seed.  Acts  ii.  38,  39,  &c.  He 
goes  on  to  give  Scripture  references  in  favor  of 
many  minor  principles  of  Congregational  order 
also. 


96  CONGREGATIONALISM. 

I  condense  Mitchell's  enumeration  '  as  follows 
Church,  a  society  of  believers  united  together  by 
their  own  consent  for  worship  and  the  ordinances 
of  the  gospel.  —  Church  power,  vested  in  the  church 
itself,  and  not  in  its  officers. —  Church  officers,  mini- 
sters and  deacons.  —  Churches,  in  a  qualified  sense 
independent ;  no  church  or  church  officers  have  au- 
thority to  interfere  with  the  faith  or  discipline  of 
another  church,  but  an  erring  church  is  open  to  the 
reproofs  of  others;  and,  if  the  case  requires,  they 
may  be  disowned  from  the  general  communion. 
They  do  not  allow  the  imposition  of  human  creeds 
as  tests  of  orthodoxy  or  terms  of  communion. 

Punchard '  states  them  thus :  "  The  Scriptures 
are  an  infallible  guide  to  church  order  and  disci- 
pline. —  A  Christian  church  is  a  voluntary  asso- 
ciation of  persons  professing  repentance  for  sin  and 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  united  together  by  a  solemn 
covenant  for  the  worship  of  God  and  the  celebration 
of  religious  ordinances.  —  This  company  should 
ordinarily  consist  of  no  more  than  can  conveniently 
and  statedly  meet  together  for  religious  purposes.  — 
To  this  assembly  all  executive  ecclesiastical  or 
church  power  is  intrusted  by  Jesus  Christ,  the  great 
Head  of  the  Church."  To  this  he  adds  a  summary 
of  their  doctrines,  viz. :  —  But  two  orders  of  church 
officers,  bishops  and  deacons ;  equality  of  all  bi- 
shops ;  councils  have  no  juridical  authority;  church- 
es, though  independent  in  worship  and  discipline, 
should  hold  themselves  ready  to  give  account  to 
sister-churches  of  their  faith  and  religious  practices. 
He  gives  a  similar  epitome  in  his  View.* 


CONGREGATIONALISM.  .  97 

Rev.  J.  Allyn,  in  his  Plymouth  Anniversary  Ser- 
mon;* Mr.  Thacher,  in  his  History  of  Plymouth* 
(from  Dr.  Belknap) ;  Prince,  in  his  Chronology ; ' 
and  Upham,  in  his  Ratio  Disciplinse,^  give  the  prin- 
ciples of  Robinson's  church,  corresponding  with  the 
above  summaries. —  See  Government,  Congrega- 
tional. 

»  Model  in  Han.  iii.  246.  «  Guide,  37,  38.  ^  Hist.  13,  14. 
*Page  29.  *  Pages  13,  14.  « Page  261.  'Pages  91—93. 
»  Page  37. 

CONGREGATIONALISM  hy  divine  right.  — 
Neal  ^  says  that  the  "  Independents  in  the  West- 
minster Assembly  opposed  the  proposition  of  the 
divine  right  of  Presbytery  by  advancing  a  counter 
divine  right  of  their  own  scheme.  .  .  .  They  main- 
tained that  the  church  at  Jerusalem  was  no  larger 
than  could  meet  in  one  place,  Acts  ii.  46 ;  v.  12, 14 ; 
that,  even  when  they  were  grown  very  large,  the 
whole  multitude  came  together  to  choose  deacons. 
Acts  vi.  2 — 5 ;  and  that,  even  after  the  general  dis- 
persion, they  all  met  in  one  place.  Acts  xv.  4,  22." 
This  they  advanced  in  opposition  to  the  argument 
that  there  was  a  Presbyterial  church  there,  consist- 
ing of  several  separate  assemblies.  Samuel  Ma- 
ther ^  maintains  that  the  rejecting  of  Congrega- 
tionalism is  the  rejecting  of  the  kingly  authority  of 
Christ,  and  giving  the  inheritance  of  our  fathers  to 
others.  Increase  Mather^  maintains  that  Congre- 
gational  discipline  is  jure  divino.  Henry  Jacob  * 
says :  "  Every  particular  ordinary  congregation  of 
faithful  people  in  England  is  a  true  and  proper 
9 


98  CONGREGATIONALISM. 

visible  church,  jure  divino^  —  by  right  from  God." 
His  Church  Confession*  shows  that  there  is  no 
other  way  in  which  they  can  obey  the  divine  com- 
mand, "  Tell  it  to  the  church."  Cambridge  Plat- 
form ^  says :  "  A  Congregational  church  is,  by  the 
institution  of  Christ,  a  part  of  the  militant  visible 
church." 

*  Puritans,  vol.  ii.  9.  '  Apology,  143.  '  Preface  to  Disquisi- 
tion on  Ecclesiastical  Councils,  iii.  ^  Reasons  for  Reforming  the 
Churches  in  England,  in  Han.  i.  222.  ^  Art.  xxviii.  in  Han.  i.  303. 
®  Chap.  ii.  sect.  6. 

CONGREGATIONALISM  adopted  by  those  loho 
had  no  personal  interest  to  serve.  —  The  Indepen- 
dents in  the  Westminister  Assembly  say,^  that  it 
was  in  their  expatriation  that  they  commenced  in- 
quiring, "  What  were  the  first  apostolic  directions, 
pattern,  and  examples  of  those  primitive  churches 
recorded  in  the  New  Testament?  We  had,  of  all 
men,  the  greatest  reason  to  be  true  to  our  own  con- 
scieftces  in  what  we  should  embrace,  seeing  it  was 
for  our  consciences  we  were  deprived  of  whatsoever 
was  dear  to  us."  A  notable  instance  occurred  in 
the  case  of  Mr.  Higginson  and  his  church  in  Salem. 
They,  on  their  way  to  New  England,  set  about 
establishing  the  most  scriptural  form  of  church  go- 
vernment, now  that  they  were  under  no  necessity  of 
conformity.  They  adopted  a  Congregational  form, 
while  they  had  great  prejudices  against  their  Ply- 
mouth neighbors,  growing  out  of  the  current  mis- 
representations of  their  tenets,  till  Dr.  Fuller  made 
the  surprising  discovery  that  the  two  churches, 
looking  to  the  Scripture  alone  for  a  directory,  were 


CONGREGATIONALISM.  99 

essentially  on  the  same  basis  of  church  order  and 
discipline.''  The  exiles  at  Frankfort,  and  Mr.  Ro- 
binson, with  his  church,  also  adopted  essentially 
the  same  plan,  without  concert.' 

In  Han.  ii.  222.    ^  Hall's  Puritans,  220—223.     ^  lb.  74,  147. 

CONGREGATIONALISM  has  power  to  prevent 
and  redress  error,  —  It  has  been  a  standing  accusa- 
tion that  it  has  no  such  power ;  but  the  charge  is 
not  admitted.  Simpson,  in  his  answer  to  Forbes, 
or  Anatomist  Anatomized,^  asks :  "  What  flaming 
sword  is  there  in  a  classical  Presbytery  to  keep 
men  out  of  errors,  which  may  not  be  in  a  Congre- 
gation ?  "  And  says  :  "  If  the  counsel  and  advice 
of  other  neighbor-churches  be  required,  a  congre- 
gation may  have  that  as  well,  and  perhaps  sooner 
than  a  classis  can.  There  have  been  as  great 
defections,  both  of  ministers  and  people,  unto  errors 
under  Presbyterial  government  as  under  any  other, 
as  is  clear  in  the  Low  Countries,  where  many  minis- 
ters and  people  turned  Arminians,  Papists,  Soci- 
nians,  .  .  .  and  in  other  countries  too."  T.  Welde, 
in  his  Reply  to  Rathband,^  says :  "  But  we  have 
had  '  divisions '  amongst  us.  These  '  divisions '  were 
not  caused  by  our  church  discipline,  but  by  certain 
vile  opinions  brought  us  from  England.  When 
these  opinions  did  fall,  our  discipline  stood;  which 
shows  that  our  discipline  bred  them  not,  but  de- 
stroyed them."  Burroughs,  in  his  Irenicum,'  says : 
"  There  is  no  church  government  that  holds  forth 
more  means  to  reduce  from  error  than  this  doth.  .  .  . 
If  men  will  not  conscientiously  regard  what  is  done 


100  CONGREGATIONALISM. 

to  reduce  them  from  evil,  there  is  no  help  within 
the  church  but  an  appeal  to  Christ."  Punchard  * 
shows  at  length,  "  that  it  presents  the  most  effica- 
cious barrier  to  the  inroads  of  heresy,  false  doctrine, 
and  general  corruption."  —  See  Appeals  ;  Congre- 
gationalism, its  prospects  realized. 

In  Han.  ii.  245.     ^  lb.  297.     ^  lb.  iii.  118.    *  View,  248—255. 

CONGREGATIONALISM  fitted  to  all  circum- 
stances of  the  church,  —  Goodwin  devotes  the  tenth 
chapter  of  his  second  book  on  Church  Government 
to  establish  this  point.  His  arguments  may  be 
thus  epitomized.  In  answer  to  the  theory,  that, 
when  whole  nations  turn  Christian,  the  church  gov- 
ernment should  be  conformed  to  the  national,  he 
shows  "  that  God  designed  to  redeem  his  church 
out  of  every  nation ; "  that,  if  he  had  intended  that 
there  should  have  been  national  Christian  churches, 
he  would  have  given  rules  answerable,  as  he  did  to 
the  Jewish  church.  He  shows  that  Congregational 
churches  are  so  constituted  that  they  will  suit  all 
circumstances,  in  the  beginning  of  the  gospel,  and 
the  continuance  of  the  gospel ;  all  places,  whether 
villages  or  cities;  all  conditions,  whether  of  perse- 
cution or  peace,  whether  pure  or  corrupt,  whether 
reforming  or  to  be  reformed.  He  clearly  shows, 
that  there  are  many  circumstances  in  which  no 
other  form  of  church  government  can  be  practised, 
as  of  outward  persecution  or  isolated  churches, 
churches  deprived  of  officers,  &c.  —  See  Congrega- 
tional Churches,  early  history  of;  Congregation- 
alism has  povjer  to  prevent  error. 


CONGREGATIONALISM.  101 

CONGREGATIONALISM,  ivhence  its  greatest 
danger. —  Higginson  and  Hubbard,  in  their  Testi- 
mony appended  to  Cambridge  Platform,  say :  * 
"  Concerning  all  sinful  attempts  to  overturn  the 
order  of  the  gospel  hitherto  upheld  in  New  Eng- 
land, and  to  spoil  the  glorious  work  of  God,  which 
we  have  seen  him  doing,  with  a  series  of  remarka- 
ble providences,  in  erecting  such  Congregational 
churches  in  these  ends  of  the  earth,  —  they  are 
doubtless  displeasing  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
walks  in  the  midst  of  these  golden  candlesticks,  and 
will  prove  bitterness  in  the  latter  end.  .  .  .  And  one 
great  point  in  the  decay  of  the  power  of  vital  god- 
liness is  men's  growing  weary  of  the  Congrega- 
tional discipline,  which  is  evidently  calculated  to 
maintain  it."  Punchard  ^  mentions  several  causes 
of  the  decline  of  Congregationalism ;  among  which 
are  the  impression  "  that  no  efforts  are  required  to 
protect  and  promote  our  excellent  system  of  church 
government;  .  .  .  the  dearth  of  modern  books  upon 
Congregationalism:  .  .  .  a  prevalent  impression  that 
Congregationalists  have  no  well-defined  and  set- 
tled principles  of  church  polity."-  He  says  :  "  Have 
these  principles  made  New  England  an  intel- 
lectual and  moral  garden,  and  shall  we  be  told  that 
they  will  not  answer  for  the  South  and  West?" 
Whether  with  definite  aim  or  drawing  a  bow  at 
venture,  he  says  :  ^  "  But  if  the  professors  in  any 
of  our  theological  seminaries  are  even  apparently 
indifferent  to  our  church  polity,  we  need  not  be 
surprised  to  find  their  pupils  really  so." 

Page  68.    ^  View,  23—25.    ^  Page  25. 
9* 


102  CONGREGATIONALISM. 

CONGREGATIONALISM,  duty  to  abide  by.— 
Lobb,  in  his  True  Dissenter,  says :  ^  "What  can 
the  breaking  down  of  the  Congregational  bonds, 
changing  the  congregational  offices,  deposing  their 
officers,  and  setting  up  new  ones  after  the  diocesan 
model,  and  governing  by  other  laws  and  rules,  be 
but  a  rejecting  of  Christ,  a  destroying  of  his  govern- 
ment, and  an  open  breach  of  our  allegiance  to 
him  ?  "  Upham  "  says :  "  And  we  may  safely  aver 
of  such  an  edifice,  erected  with  great  labor  and 
sanctified  by  prayer,  and  now  rendered  venerable 
by  age,  that  it  is  not  to  be  lightly  esteemed,  still 
less  wantonly  abandoned.  But  it  becomes  us,  as 
in  the  days  of  Jeremiah,  to  stand  in  the  way,  and 
see  and  ask  for  the  old  paths,  where  is  the  good 
way,  and  walk  therein,  and  we  shall  find  rest  for 
our  souls." 

1  Page  129.     ^  Rat.  Dis,  33. 

CONGREGATIONALISM,  its  prospects  foreseen. 
John  Robinson,  in  his  Justification  of  Separation, 
in  answer  to  Bernard,^  says,  in  reply  to  his  taunts 
concerning  the  "  fewness  of  their  numbers  :  "  "  Re- 
ligion is  not  always  sown  and  reaped  in  one  age. 
One  soweth,  and  another  reapeth.  The  many  that 
are  already  gathered,  by  the  mercy  of  God,  into  the 
kingdom  of  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  nearness 
of  many  more  through  the  whole  land,  —  for  the 
regions  are  white  unto  the  harvest, —  do  promise, 
in  less  than  a  hundred  years,  if  our  sins  and  theirs 
make  not  us  and  them  unworthy  of  this  mercy,  a 
very  plentiful  harvest."     A  foresight  by  no  means 


♦  CONSCIENCE.  103 

discouraging  to  those  who,  on  forbidden  "  ground  " 
now  labor  to  establish  the  discipline  which  Christ 
has  instituted. 

>  In  Han.  i.  209 ;  and  Works,  ii.  66. 

CONGREGATIONALISM,  fts  prospects  realized, 
Hutchinson,  in  his  History  of  Massachusetts,  says :  ^ 
"  But,  however  this  constitution  may  appear  in 
theory,  we  shall  seldom  meet  with  an  instance  in 
which  there  has  been  so  steady  and  so  general 
an  adherence  to  the  principles  on  which  it  was 
founded,  and  so  much  harmony  subsisting,  not  only 
in  particular  churches,  but  also  between  one  church 
and  another,  for  fifty  years  together." 

*  Vol.  i.  374.  —  See  further  on  the  general  subject  of  Congre- 
gationalism under  the  head  Independency. 

CONSCIENCE.—  Lord  Brooke,  in  his  Disquisi- 
tion on  Episcopacy,*  says :  "  No  power  on  earth 
ought  to  force  my  practice  any  more  than  my  judg- 
ment." He  admits  church  power  to  expel  him, 
but  no  feyrther.  The  conforming  prelates  required 
uniformity  in  all  things,  without  respect  to  con- 
science :  hence  the  conscientious  suffered,  and  the 
unprincipled  escaped.  Burton,  in  his  Rejoinder  to 
Prynne,  maintained  ^  that  it  is  the  greatest  hypoc- 
risy in  the  world  to  pretend  to  follow  what  autho- 
rity commands,  and  yet  man's  own  conscience 
thinks  ought  not  to  be  done.  Again :  ^  "  If  I  am 
bound  to  believe  what  they  say  who  are  in  autho- 
rity, then  my  conscience  is  subject  to  error."  S. 
Mather  shows  *  that  decisions  of  councils  should  be 


104  CONSCIENCE. 

accepted  when  they  are  reasonable  and  scriptura. 
only.  R.  "Williams  and  his  followers  had  carried 
the  doctrine  of  liberty  of  conscience  to  such  an 
extreme  as  to  assert  that  no  man  should  be  cen- 
sured for  any  thi»g  when  he  pleaded  conscience. 
By  this  they  found  that  they  had  stultified  them- 
selves, when  one  Verrrin  pleaded  conscience  for 
preventing  his  wife  from  meeting  with  them.*  John 
Cook^  says  he  (an  Independent)  thinks  it  better 
that  Protestants,  who  are  in  a  parish,  if  they  are  of 
three  different  opinions,  should  have  three  several 
meeting-places,  than  fight  and  live  in  perpetual 
jars  with  one  another.  Isaac  Chauncy  shows  ^  that 
Christians  ought  not  to  subject  their  consciences  to 
human  will  or  laws.  John  Howe,  in  his  Union 
among  Protestants,^  appeals  to  those  who  most 
severely  blame  any  for  dissent, — if  they  (Dissenters) 
should  declare,  "  It  is  truly  against  our  consciences 
to  communicate  with  you  on  your  terms,  yet,  to 
please  you,  and  avoid  temporal  inconvenience,  we 
will  do  it,"  — whether  we  should  not  thereby  make 
ourselves  incapable  of  any  communion,  ^ther  with 
you  or  any  others  ?  John  Corbett  ^  says  :  "  When 
men's  commands  contradict  the  commands  of  God, 
it  is  God,  and  not  man,  that  must  have  the  pre- 
eminence. With  us  it  is  no  controversy  whether 
the  king  or  conscience  be  the  supreme  .governor." 
The  Savoy  Confession  ^°  says :  "  God  alone  is  Lord 
of  conscience,  and  hath  left  it  free  from  doctrines 
and  commandments  of  men,  which  are  in  any  thing 
contrary  to  his  word,  or  not  contained  in  it:  so 
that  to  believe  such  doctrines  or  to  obey  such  com- 


CONSECRATIONS.  105 

mands,  out  of  conscience,  is  to  betray  true  liberty 
of  conscience;  and  the  requiring  of  an  implicit 
faith,  and  an  absolute  and  blind  obedience,  is  to 
destroy  liberty  of  conscience,  and  reason  also." 

1  In  Han.  ii.  122.  ^  Page  19.  ^  Page  48.  *  Apology,  5,  6. 
^  Winthrop's  Journal,  i.  283.  «  In  Han.  iii.  258.  '  Divine  Inst. 
Cong.  Churches,  Preface,  vi.  ^  Works,  480.  ®  Princip.  and  Pract. 
of  Several  Nonconformists,  9.  ^°  Chap.  xxi.  in  Upham's  Rat. 
Dis.  288,  289. 

CONSECRATIONS  discarded.-- Consecmiions  of 
churches,  vestments,  and  implements,  were  among 
the  things  objected  to  by  the  Separation  against 
the  church  of  England.  Neal  ^  speaks  of  these  as 
one  great  objection  to  Archbishop  Laud's  adminis- 
tration ;  he  proceeding  even  to  consecrated  knives 
to  cut  the  sacramental  bread.  The  Bishop  of 
Norwich  is  represented^  as  instituting  the  inquiry, 
in  his  primary  articles  of  visitation,  "  whether  the 
churchyards  were  consecrated  ?  "  This  was  a  ques- 
tion stoutly  disputed  on  Archbishop  Laud's  trial.^ 
The  managers  objected  to  the  consecrating  of  cha- 
pels, churchyards,  altars,  furniture,  &c.,  as  popish 
innovations.  The  archbishop  maintained  the  ne- 
cessity of  the  same,  in  order  to  render  them  holy 
things.  The  managers  asserted,  that  "we»  have 
no  credible  authority  for  consecrating  churches  for 
the  first  three  hundred  years.'^  Barrowe  *  inveighs 
against  the  "  hallowed  church  and  churchyard, 
^nd  hallowed  fonts,  hallowed  bells,  organs,  and 
musics."  Ainsworth  *  is  out  upon  such  consecra- 
tions, saying  that  none  of  Jeroboam's  priests  could 
turn  their  hands  to  such  powerful  works  as  the 


106  CONSECRATIONS. 

advocates  of  "  consecrated  churches,  chapels,  minis- 
ters, bells,  fonts,  and  churchyards,  the  relics  of  the 
idolatry  of  Rome,  practised  even  by  those  who  hate 
the  whore  and  eat  her  flesh."  Robinson,  in  his 
Apology,^  condemns  "  a  holy  place,  as  it  is  counted 
by  most,  consecrated  either  to  God  himself  or  to 
some  saint."  He  does  not  object  to  a  meeting- 
house, "  provided  the  opinion  of  holiness  be  re- 
moved." In  his  Posthumous  Treatise,^  he  says,  in 
answer  to  an  objector  to  worshipping  in  a  conse- 
crated church :  "  I  have  no  more  religious  use  for 
the  place  in  which  I  hear  publicly,  than  in  which  I 
pray  privately  in  my  house  or  chamber."  It  ap- 
pears from  the  Magnalia,^  that  Congregationalists 
had  no  consecrated  meeting-houses,  and  that  houses 
for  public  worship  might  be  used  for  secular  pur- 
poses, provided  it  were  done  in  such  a  manner 
that  no  implicit  affront  was  thereby  offered  to  Him 
who  was  worshipped  there.  Of  late,  however, 
there  seems  to  be  a  lamentable  degeneracy  among 
the  descendants  of  the  Puritans  in  this  particular. 
We  often  hear  expressiohs  in  dedicatory  prayers  of 
meeting-houses,  which  imply  a  complete  consecra- 
tion, even  to  denouncing  any  who  shall  henceforth 
put  the  building  to  any  secular  use.  We  have 
also  consecrating  prayers  at  ordinations  and  form- 
ing of  churches;  and  even  Mr.  Mitchell,  in  his 
Guide,^  though  he  disclaims  all  reverence  for  mere 
wood  and  stone,  treats  of  the  inconsistency  of  dedi- 
cating a  house  to  God,  and  then  using  it  for  secular 
purposes;  quoting  the  words  which  were  applied 
to  the  consecrated  temple,    "  Ye   shall   reverence 


CONSOCIATIONS.  107 

my  sanctuary."  One  of  the  Genevan  Disputants  ^° 
says  of  the  consecration  of  the  emblems  of  the 
Lord's.  Supper :  "  They  are  to  be  condemned  who 
attribute  some  holiness  to  the  signs ;  and  as  for 
those  who  worship  them,  these  we  utterly  detest  as 
open  idolaters."  —  See  Dedications,  Ceremonies. 

1  Puritans,  i.  304.  ^  lb.  325.  =*  lb.  509,  510.  ■»  In  Han.  i.  60. 
»  lb.  237,  238.  «  lb.  382,  383 ;  and  Works,  iii.  59.  '  Han.  i. 
457;  and  Works,  iii.  374.  »  Vol.  ii.  226.  ^  Pages  216,  217. 
^^  Page  164. 

CONSOCIATIONS,  orig-in  of.  —  Trumbull  in- 
forms us,^  that  in  1659  the  General  Court  of  Con- 
necticut ordered  a  council,  the  decision  whereof 
should  be  final.  The  General  Court  of  Massachu- 
setts endeavored  to  establish  the  same  thing,  and 
so  called  the  synod  of  1662.  These  synods  em- 
braced not  only  all  the  ministers  of  the  colony 
whose  legislature  called  them,  but  also  certain  spe- 
cified individuals  of  the  other  colonies,  to  ensure 
majorities.  But  they  failed  of  such  a  majority  in 
Connecticut,  through  this  over-management.  The 
Boston  Synod  was  more  successful,  and  recom- 
mended a  consociation,  having  first,  how^ever,  pre- 
mised that  it  should  be  shorn  of  its  locks,  by  being 
stripped  of  juridical  power.  (See  Consociations, 
power  of.)  The  General  Courts  having  attained 
their  main  ends  in  the  decisions  for  the  half-way 
covenant,  and  the  churches  generally  and  some  of 
the  principal  ministers  opposing,  the  matter  of  con- 
sociations slumbered  till  about  the  beginning  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  when  Cotton  Mather,  having 


108  CONSOCIATIONS. 

converted  his  father  in  his  dotage,  led  in  a  strenuous 
effort  to  establish  a  virtual  consociation.  Proposals 
were  introduced  into  the  Boston  Association,  and 
through  them  to  the  Massachusetts  Convention ; 
but  they  were  successfully  opposed  by  John  Wise 
of  Ipswich  and  others.^  The  proposals,  which  may 
be  seen  in  Wise's  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Es- 
poused,' were  rejected  in  Massachusetts,  but  were 
soon  received  in  Connecticut,  and  from  that  time 
have  formed  the  basis  of  their  consociations. 
Trumoull'*  gives  a  particular  account  of  the  intro- 
duction of  the  Saybrook  Platform,  and  of  the 
opposition  which  was  made  to  it  by  some  of  the 
churches.  President  Stiles  informs  us,*  that  in 
1662  Mr.  Shepard  drew  up  proposals  for  a  conso- 
ciation to  hear  and  give  judgment  in  ecclesiastical 
controversies,  but  it  was  rejected;  that  it  was 
ripened  into  a  formal  plan  in  1700,  and  renewed  in 
1705,  but  the  opposition  in  the  associations,  and 
from  the  unassociated  pastors,  prevented  its  being 
recommended  to  the  churches,  "  where  it  would 
have  met  with  still  greater  opposition,  through  the 
spirit  of  liberty."  Serious  attempts  have  since  been 
made  to  revive  the  subject,  but  without  success. 

*  Hist.  Conn.  chap.  xiii.  ^  See  Wise's  Quarrel  of  the  Churches 
Espoused,  a  work  recommended  by  Samuel  Moody,  Peter  Thacher, 
Joseph  Sewall,  Thomas  Prince,  John  Webb,  "William  Cooper, 
and  Thomas  Foxcroft.  ^  ib.  77—80.  ^  Hist.  Conn.  607—514. 
•  Conv.  Sermon,  68,  69. 

CONSOCIATIONS,  power  of.  —  The  Boston  Sy- 
nod of  1662  *  say :  "  Every  church  .  .  .  has  received 
from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  full  power  and  authority, 


CONSOCIATIONS.  10^ 

ecclesiastical  within  itself,  regularly  to  administer 
all  the  ordinances  of  Christ,  and  is  not  under  any 
other  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  whatever :  .  .  .  hence 
it  follows,  that  consociations  are  not  to  hinder  the 
exercise  of  his  power,  but  by  counsel  from  the  word 
of  God  to  direct  and  strengthen  the  same  upon  all 
just  occasions."  They  go  on  to  define  the  objects 
of  consociations,  and  to  recommend  them  to  the 
churches.  Samuel  Mather  shows"  that  a  conso- 
ciation of  churches  was  acknowledged  by  the  early 
New  England  Congregationalists,  in  the  sense  of 
asking-  light  not  of  government.  What  is  the  autho- 
riry  of  the  consociations  in  Connecticut,  it  seems,  is 
still  as  ever  an  open  question ;  and  Mitchell,  follow- 
ing Stiles,"  maintains  that  it  was  designedly  left 
ambiguous  whether  they  should  be  juridical  or 
merely  advisory,  because  in  that  way  only  could 
they  succeed  in  establishing  it  in  the  beginning. 
Dr.  Stiles  *  shows  that  the  first  principles  and  the 
(evident)  interlining  of  the  Saybrook  Platform 
clash ;  the  one  giving  unlimited  power  to  the 
churches,  and  the  other  vesting  controlling  power 
in  consociations.  He  argues  that  it  is  to  be  inter- 
preted in  a  sense  subordinate  to  the  first  great  de- 
clared general  principle ;  as  that  is,  doubtless,  the 
sense  in  which  the  adopting  churches  received  it. 
He  shows  that  the  history  of  consociations,  for  the 
first  forty  years,  proves  that  they  were  then  only 
meant  and  received  as  advisory.  He,  however, 
clearly  shows  that  there  was  a  design  in  a  part, 
and  only  a  part,  of  the  framers  of  the  Saybrook 
Platform  to  make  consociations  juridical.    It  seems 

10 


110  CONSOCIATIONS. 

that  that  which  is  crooked  cannot  yet  be  made 
straight;  some  men  are  still  wearying  themselves 
to  learn  how  the  Saybrook  Convention  meant  to 
define  the  power  of  consociations,  which  this  ser- 
mon proves  conclusively  that  they  did  not  mean  to 
define  at  all. —  See  Saybrook  Platform. 

*  Ans.  1  to  Quest.  2.  ^  Apology,  21.  ^  Guide,  229,  note. 
*  Conv.  Sermon,  72—80. 

CONSOCIATIONS,  reasons  urged  for. —  Increase 
Mather,  in  his  Disquisition  on  Ecclesiastical  Coun- 
cils, says :  *  "  That  there  should  be  such  a  conso- 
ciation, agreeing  among  themselves  that  no  new 
churches  shall  be  owned  by  them,  or  pastor  ordained 
or  deposed  without  them,  ...  is  not  only  lawful, 
but  absolutely  necessary  for  the  establishment  of 
these  churches."  Yet  he  says :  ^  All  "  Congrega- 
tionalists,  of  which  Mr.  Cotton  is  not  the  least,  deny 
that  synods  have  any  authority  of  rule  or  jurisdic- 
tion." He  quotes  Norton,  asserting  that  the  power 
of  synods  is  decisive,  not  authoritative.  Mitchell ' 
enumerates  six  advantages  of  consociations,  one 
of  which  is,  they  have,  as  he  affirms,  entirely  (?) 
done  away  with  the  evil  they  were  originally  de- 
signed to  remedy,  —  the  calling  of  council  against 
council.  The  Historical  Account  of  Saybrook  Plat- 
form "*  represents  them  as  —  "  1.  The  promotion  of 
order  and  harmony  among  ministers  and  churches. 
2.  The  regular  introduction  of  candidates  into  the 
ministry.  3.  And  especially  the  establishment  of 
a  board  of  appeal."  Dr.  Dwight^  is  loud  in  the 
praise  of  consociations,  or  courts  of  judicature,  and 


CONSOCIATIONS.  Ill 

only  laments  that  there  is  not  "  a  still  superior  tri- 
bniial  to  receive  appeals  in  cases  where  they  are 
absolutely  necessary."  In  a  word,  the  arguments 
for  consociations  are,  like  those  for  Presbytery  and 
Hierarchy,  all  founded  on  the  supposed  benefits  of 
unity  and  concert  in  all  action,  and  would  be  un- 
answerable were  the  tribunal  itself  proved  to  be 
infallible. 

^  Page  34.  ^  Pages  28,  29.  ■^  Guide,  231,  note.  •*  In  Congre- 
gational Order,  37.     *  Works,  Serm.  clxii. 

CONSOCIATIONS,  objections  to.  —  Congrega- 
tionalists,  strictly  so  called,  have  uniformly  objected 
to  these  with  juridical  powers.  The  framers  of 
Saybrook  Platform  did  not,  at  first,  claim  to  be 
strict  Congregationalists.^  Richard  Mather  and 
William  Tompson^  assert,  —  and  quote  Dr.  Ames's 
Cases  of  Conscience,  book  iv.  chap.  xxiv.  sect.  17,  — 
"  That  if  the  power  to  reprove  scandals,  and  cast 
out  the  wicked,  belongs  to  churches  that  have  no 
neighbors,  then  it  belongs  to  those  who  have  them ; 
so  consociation,  or  '  neighborhood  of  churches,'  does 
not  abridge  the  power  of  individual  churches.'* 
Goodwin^  shows  that  the  consociation  principle 
w^as  not  practised  by  the  church  at  Corinth,  because 
they  did  not  call  in  the  neighboring  church  of  Cen- 
chrea  in  their  case  of  difficulty,  but  excommuni- 
cated and  restored,  as  having  entire  jurisdiction 
within  themselves.  Hooker  is  claimed  as  the  great 
patron  and  projector  of  consociations;  but  he  ar- 
gues *  that  none  of  us  deny  a  consociation  by  way 
of  advice,  but  it  is  a  very  different  thing  from   a 


112  CONSOCIATIONS. 

church  of  churches.  John  Wise  says  of  the  Pro- 
posals,^ that  such  a  proposition  out-bishops  all  the 
bishops,  and  out-popes  the  pope  himself.  Trum- 
bull^ frequently  speaks  of  Consociationists  in  dis- 
tinction from  the  strict  Congregationalists.  So 
does  the  Appeal  of  Eastern  Association  of  Wind- 
ham County,  Conn. ;  "^  as  also  President  Stiles. 
He  savs,  in  his  Convention  Sermon  :  ^  "  If  a  conso- 
ciated  church  is  excommunicated  (for  denial  of 
jurisdiction),  it  reverts  to  the  state  of  a  Congrega- 
tional one,  and  has  communion  with  Congregational 
churches."  In  his  Election  Sermon,''  he  speaks  of 
the  Congregational^  the  Consociated,  and  the  Presby- 
terian churches.  Davenport  ^°  recommends  a  con- 
sociation for  mutual  advice  only.  Burton  says:" 
We  hold  communion  or  consociation  of  churches 
for  counsel  in  doubts  and  comfort  in  distress,  but 
deny  any  such  combination  of  churches  as  whereby 
the  liberty  of  any  particular  church  is  taken  away. 
President  Stiles  has  another  objection  to  Connecti- 
cut consociationism  :  ^^  it  makes  "  a  majority  of  the 
pastors,  as  well  as  of  the  consociation,  necessary  to 
pass  a  valid  act,"  so  that  "the  legs  of  the  lame 
are  not  equal."  Increase  Mather,  in  his  Disquisi- 
tion on  Ecclesiastical  Councils  (Preface),  deprecates 
such  a  monopoly  of  power.  Gov.  Wolcott  also 
wrote  an  Answer  to  Mr.  Hobert,  in  which  he  com- 
pared the  Cambridge  and  Saybrook  Platforms,  and 
argues  the  latter  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  toleration  and  religious  freedom.''  Cotton 
Mather,  though  the  primum  mobile  of  the  original 
movement,  retracts  his  zeal  for  the  necessity  of 


COUNCILS.  113 

consociations  in  his  Ratio  DisciplinaD,'*  saying : 
"  It  may  be  the  prudent  servants  of  God  had  it  (the 
confusion  which  was  feared  for  want  of  consocia- 
tion) more  in  fear  than  there  was  any  real  need  of. 
.  .  .  The  churches  have  not,  in  fact,  seen  much  of 
this  confusion."  A  frank  and  very  important  con- 
fession from  such  a  man,  vanquished  as  he  had 
been  twenty-one  years  before.  —  See  Councils, 
Synods,  Power.  See  Punchard's  View,  103 — 113, 
Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  191—195. 

^  Trumbull's  Hist.  Conn.  i.  486,  437.  *  Ans.  to  Herle,  in  Han. 
ii.  172,  173.  3  Church  Gov.  71,  72.  *  Survey,  part  i.  87.  ^  Page 
148.  «  Hist.  Conn.  chap.  xiii.  xix.  '  Page  19.  «  Page  88.  '  Page 
67.  ^"  Apologetical  Reply,  230.  "  Ans.  to  Prynne,  in  Han.  ii. 
394.  '2  Convention  Serm.  71.  "  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  510.  ^*  Page 
183,  184. 

CONTUMACY.  —  Cotton  Mather  says :  ^  "  If  the 
person  do  out  of  contempt  refuse  to  make  his  ap- 
pearance, the  pastor  moves  the  church  to  concur 
(after  some  further  exercise  of  forbearance,  if  in 
their  lenity  they  think  necessary)  in  his  excommu- 
nication." This  is  believed  to  be  the  universal 
sentiment  on  this  point;  the  delinquent  refuses  to 
hear  the  church.  Care  should,  however,  be  taken 
to  be  sure  that  the  absence  is  not  providential,  in- 
voluntary, or  necessary. 

» Rat.  Dis.  U5, 

COUNCILS,  earli/.  —  Increase  Mather  informs 
us  *  that  the  first,  after  the  apostolic,  assembled  A.D. 
180,  and  condemned  the  heresy  of  Montanus.  Also, 
that  the  second  Ephesian  synod,  A.D.  450,  compelled 

10* 


114  COUNCILS. 

their  members  by  torture;  to  submit  to  the  decrees  of 
the  majority.  T.  Hooker^  declares  that  there  was 
no  general  council  after  our  Saviour  by  the  space 
of  three  hundred  years.  In  the  view  of  Congrega- 
tionalists,  it  had  been  well  if  such  councils  had 
never  assembled  again.  Owen,  in  his  Nature  of 
Schism,'  says :  "  I  do  not  know  of  any  thing,  which 
is  extant,  bearing  clearer  witness  of  the  degeneracy 
of  the  Christian  religion,  .  .  .  than  the  stories  of  the 
acts  and  laws  of  councils  and  synods."  He  shows 
that  there  neither  has  been  nor  can  be  any  proper 
general  council  representing  the  whole  church,  since 
the  apostles.  Punchard  ^  alludes  to  some  of  the 
steps  by  which  these  general  councils  corrupted  the 
early  churches. 

^  Disquisition  on  Ecc.  Councils,  3,  4.     ^  Survey,  part  i.  238. 
■  In  Han.  iii.  440.    "*  Hist.  Cong.  21. 

COUNCILS,  proper  objects  of.  —  Thomas  Good- 
win says  ^  of  the  church  at  Antioch  :  "  They  did  , 
not,  ...  as  wanting  power,  appeal  ...  as  to  a  court 
of  judicature,  . .  .  but  only  sent  for  advice  and  coun- 
sel in  a  difficult  case."  Richard  Mather '  represents 
the  objects  of  councils  to  be  "to  communicate  light, 
not  for  the  imperious  binding  of  the  church  to  rest 
in  their  dictates,  but  by  propounding  their  grounds 
from  the  Scriptures."  He  shows'  that  churches 
are  independent,  but  "  confederate,  not  to  use  or 
exercise  their  power,  but  with  mutual  communion 
one  asking  counsel  of  the  other.  .  .  .  To  bind  them 
to  do  no  weighty  thing  without  counsel .  .  .  were  to 
bind  them  to  be  imperfect.  .  .  .  The  decree  op  a 


COUNCILS.  115 

COUNCIL  HATH  SO  MUCH  FORCE  AS  THERE  IS  FORCE  IN 

THE  REASON  OF  IT."  PuHchard  ^  shows  that  these 
were  also  the  opinions  of  John  Robinson.  Rapin* 
affirms  that  the  Independents  in  the  Westminster 
Assembly  differed  from  the  other  reformed  churches 
only  about  the  jurisdiction  of  classes,  synods,  and 
convocations,  and  the  point  of  liberty  of  conscience. 
Ainsworth,  in  his  reply  to  Paget,^  shows  that,  as 
many  godly  Christians  are  not  able  to  perform  the 
work  of  examining  candidates  for  church  officers, 
they  call  in  the  council  of  other  churches ;  but  he 
denies  the  necessity  of  such  councils  to  ordina- 
tion. Davenport,  in  his  Power  of  Congregational 
Churches,^  says :  "  Where  a  church  wants  light, 
she  should  send  for  counsel,  but  preserve  the  power 
entirely  in  her  own  hands,  where  Christ  has  placed 
it."  Welde,  in  his  reply  to  E-athband,  says : ^  "If 
the  sufficiency  of  such  men  as  they  intend  to  call 
into  office  be  not  well  known^  then  they  are  to  call 
in  the  help  and  assistance  of  the  elders  of  other 
churches,  to  survey  their  abilities,  and  inform  thera 
thereon."  Rathband  having  insinuated  that  they 
arrogated  to  ordain  without  the  concurrent  autho- 
rity of  other  churches  or  church  officers,  Welde 
replies :  ^  "  Authority  is  either  coercive  or  from 
rule  :  the  former  we  use  not,  for  want  of  Scripture 
ground ;  the  latter  we  improve  upon  all  occasions, 
by  calling  in  other  churches,  and  hold  ourselves 
bound  to  follow  their  counsel,  so  far  as  it  is  founded 
on  the  word  of  GodP  Bartlett^"  embraces,  in  his 
Compendium,  "  craving  help  and  assistance  of 
neighbor   churches,  in   difficult  cases,  by  way  of 


116  COUNCILS. 

advice  and  counsel."  John  Cotton"  shows  that 
churches  do  not  choose  officers  nor  depose  them 
without  the  approbation  of  other  churches,  because 
in  the  multitude  of  counsellors  there  is  safety. 
He  shows  ^~  that  where  a  case  is  doubtful,  and  a 
minority  dissent,  they  call  for  light  from  other 
churches.  Hubbard  ^^  gives  an  instance  of  such  a 
council  "n  Dorchester,  in  1640,  and  its  happy  re- 
sults. Mr.  Haven ^*  says:  "  The  power  of  councils 
is  merely  advisory,  nor  can  they  volunteer  that  ser- 
vice. They  cannot  come  till  they  are  asked,  nor 
extend  their  inquiries  beyond  the  point  submitted  ; 
and  their  advice  may  be  regarded  or  not,  as  may 
seem  best  to  the  party  asking." 

The  Petitioners  of  the  Church  and  Town  of  Wo- 
burn  to  the  General  Court  **  "  do  not  deny  counsel 
in  difficult  cases,"  but  maintain  that  it  is  not  al- 
ways difficult  to  determine  whether  a  man  may 
preach.  "  A  council  can  bind  no  farther  than  they 
can  make  it  fasten  by  convicting  demonstration." 
Dr.  Osgood  '^  says,  the  decree  at  Antioch,  "  passed 
in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  was  written  by  men 
confessedly  inspired,  and  did  but  confirm  what  in- 
spired men  had  taught  before."  He  is  astonished 
that  this  should  be  made,  the  foundation  of  so  many 
couficils  and  canons. 

Ch.  Gov.  85.  2  Ch.  Gov.  62.  ^  lb.  65,  66.  *  Hist.  359,  360. 
«» In  Neal,  Puritans,  i.  493.  «  In  Han.  i.  346.  '  lb.  ii.  65.  »  lb. 
316.  »Ib.  317.  ^"Ib.  iii.  246.  "  Way  of  the  Churches,  45. 
»2  lb.  96.  "  Hist.  Mass.  278.  '*  Dedham  Con.  55.  »*  In  Mass. 
Hist.  Soc.  Col.  Serm.  iii.  vol.  i.  page  40.    '*  Dudlean  Lect.  14. 


COUNCILS.  117 

COUNCILS,  have  they  authority  to  ordain  and  de- 
pose?—  Richard  Mather^  affirms  that  it  is  "the 
practice  to  call  in  the  aid  of  other  churches ;  but  it 
is  not  lawful  nor  convenient  to  call  in  such  assist- 
ance by  way  of  authority  or  power  of  ministers,  or 
of  other  churches."  Cotton  ^  maintains  that  "  ordi- 
nation is  a  work  of  church  power,"  and  that  "  the 
power  of  the  keys  is  a  liberty  purchased  to  the 
church  by  the  blood  of  Christ,"  and  should  not  be 
parted  with  at  a  less  price.  He  inquires  also.  On 
what  ground  shall  presbyters  censure  a  brother  that 
is  a  member  of  another  church  ?  Clemens  E-oma- 
nus  ^  complains  of  the  unworthy  course  of  the 
Corinthian  church,  but  never  of  their  having  exer- 
cised their  power  without  a  council.  Goodwin  ^ 
shows  that  the  bringing  in  new  ministers  should  be 
with  the  privity  and  knowledge  of  neighbor  minis- 
ters and  churches ;  "  but  that  will  not  arise  to  this, 
that  the  neighbor  ministers  have  the  power  of  ordi- 
nation, the  power  of  deposition,  or  that  they  have 
a  negative  vote,  by  way  of  jurisdiction,  to  which 
the  church  must,  by  virtue  of  an  institution,  submit. 
...  It  must  De  remembered,  that  giving  the  right 
hand  of  fellowship  is  not  giving  the  right  hand  of 
AUTHORITY,  to  choosc  them  eiders  or  to  lay  hands 
upon  them."  Dr.  H.  Ainsworth  *  acknowledges  the 
advice  of  councils  good  and  lawful,  but  not  to  do 
those  actions  which  are  peculiar  to  any  church  to 
do  for  itself.  The  General  Court  of  Massachusetts 
undertook  to  interfere  and  make  councils  neces- 
sary to  ordination  in  1651,  but  never  succeeded.^ 
Prince  ^  informs  us  that  the  church  in  Salem  sent  to 


118  ■  COUNCILS. 

that  ill  Plymouth  to  attend  Mr.  F.  Higginson's 
ordination,  "  that  they  might  have  the  approbation 
and  concurrence,  if  not  the  direction  and  assistance, 
of  the  other."  Rev.  C.  W.  Upham,  in  his  Appen- 
dix to  Dedication  Sermon,^  says :  "  They  expressly 
declared  that  the  church  in  Plymouth  should  not 
claim  any  jurisdiction  over  the  church  in*Salem; 
and,  further,  that  the  authority  of  ordination  should 
not  exist  in  the  clergy,  but  should  depend  on  the 
free  election  of  the  members  of  the  church."  The 
same  is  corroborated  in  Eliot's  Biog.  Diet.  p.  252, 
art. "  F.  Higginson,"  and  elsewhere.  Dr.  Emmons  ® 
shows  that  a  council  can  neither  put  a  pastor  into 
his  office,  nor  put  him  out  of  it,  without  the  con- 
sent of  the  church. 

1  Ch.  Gov.  41.  =  Way  of  the  Churches,  50.  ^  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  24,  25.  *  Ch.  Gov.  229.  ^  Answer  to  Pa^^et,  in  Han. 
i.  344.  «  Hubbard's  Hist.  Mass.  550.  '  Chronology,  190.  ^  Page 
52.     9  Vol.  V.  448—451. 

COUNCILS,  have  they  authority  to  reverse  deci- 
sions ?  —  Richard  Mather  ^  says  :  "  No  ecclesiastical 
power  on  earth  can  reverse  or  disannul  church  cen- 
sure." And,'  "  Councils  are  to  give  light,  not  by 
imperious  hinding  of  the  chmch  to  rest  in  their  dic- 
tates^ but  by  propounding  their  grounds  from  the 
Scriptures.  And,^  "  The  sentence  of  a  council  is 
of  itself,  only  advice,  .  .  .  not,  of  itself,  authority  nor 
necessity P  The  Leyden  church  believed  *  that  no 
church  or  church  officers  have  any  power  whatever 
over  other  churches  or  church  officers.  T.  Goodwin 
maintains  the  same :  he  says,*  "  The  church  at 
Corinth  had  an  entire  judicature  within  itself,  not 


COUNCILS,  119 

depending  upon  the  advice  of  any  for  sentence."  Dr. 
Emmons  ^  says :  "  Councils,  presbyteries,  synods, 
and  general  assemblies,  are  of  mere  human  device, 
and  have  no  authority  over  individual  churches.  It 
is  at  their  option  whether  they  will  ask  counsel ; 
and,  if  they  do  ask  it,  their  advice  is  only  advisory, 
and  they  have  a  right  to  accept  or  reject." 

»  Ch.  Gov.  47.  "^  lb.  62.  » lb.  66.  -*  Punchard,  Hist.  362. 
»  Ch.  Gov.  71.     «  Vol.  V.  450. 

COUNCILS,  have  they  any  juridical  power? — The 
Independents  in  the  Westminster  Assembly  main- 
tain* that  even  the  appeal  of  the  church  at  Antioch 
was  only  for  advice,  and  not  for  a  judicial  deter- 
mination. Samuel  Mather^  says  that  the  churches 
are  not  obliged  to  acknowledge  the  authority  of 
councils  for  their  direction.  He  shows '  that  synods 
have  no  juridical  power;  that  they  are  persuasive, 
and  not  compulsive  ;  and  "  the  churches  are  still 
free  to  accept  or  reject  their  advice."  He  moreover 
informs  us,*  that  some,  in  his  day,  wanted  a  juridical 
power;  but  he  argues  at  length  to  show  that  the 
power  which  Christ  has  given  to  his  churches  is 
sacred ;  and  concludes  *  that  churches  ought  to  call 
councils,  when  they  want  light  or  peace,  and,  if  they 
see  meet^  conform  to  the  same.  John  Wise,  in  his 
Vindication,^  and  through  his  whole  book,  shows 
that  a  council  has  only  consultative  and  not  juridi- 
cal power.  He  wrote  the  book  expressly  to  meet 
the  proposals  to  establish  such  a  power.  In  John 
White's  Lamentations,^  he  censures  a  council 
which  tried  to  induce  the  parties  to  agree  to  ac- 


120  COUNCILS. 

quiesce  in  their  decisions  before  they  heard  the 
case,  —  thus  ensnaring  their  consciences.  He  cen- 
sures ^  also  the  councils  which  usurped  the  power 
of  judgment,  and  also  of  admonition.  Trumbull^ 
asserts  that  it  was  the  opinion  of  the  principal  di- 
vines, who  settled  New  England  and  Connecticut, 
that  determinations  of  councils  were  to  be  received 
with  reverence,  but  that  they  had  no  juridical 
power.  Hooker  ^°  concludes  his  argument  on  this 
point  by  saying :  The  juridical  power  of  councils  is, 
"  I  fear,  an  invention  of  man."  In  Norton's  Cate- 
chism, question — "What  is  the  power  of  a  coun- 
cil ?  "  the  answer  is  —  "  To  declare  truth,  not  to  exer- 
cise authority."  Dr.  Osgood"  says:  "No  number 
of  churches  assembled  by  their  representatives, 
have,  from  Christ  or  his  apostles,  the  least  authority 
to  decide  any  matters  of  controversy,  either  of  faith 
or  discipline."  From  the  Answer  to  the  Hamp- 
shire Narrative,'^  it  seems  that  the  association  ar- 
gued that  "to  ask  advice  is  to  ask  to  be  directed." 
The  council  reply  that  "  it  is  not  then  asking  to 
be  advised,  but  to  be  commanded."  Dr.  Stiles  ^^ 
says :  "  Churches  reserve  to  themselves  to  refuse  or 
accept  the  advice  of  council:  .  .  .  Congregational 
churches  universally  hold  a  negative  on  the  result 
of  council. . . .  The  decision  of  council  is  of  no  force, 
till  received  and  ratified  by  the  inviting  church,  nor 
does  it  render  that  church  obnoxious  to  community 
if  she  recedes  from  advice  of  council."  He  main- 
tains that  Congregational  councils  are  advisor}/ 
only,  and  our  churches  are  absolutely  free  from 
foreign  jurisdiction.    He  shows  that  juridical  power 


COUNCILS.  121 

in  councils  clashes  with  the  complete  power  of  the 
churches,  and  that  the  synod  of  1662  declared  that 
a  particular  church  is  not  under  any  other  ecclesias- 
tical jurisdiction  whatever;  that  ^^  the  "notions" 
•  of  the  framers  of  the  Cambridge  Platform  were, 
"  that,  in  cases  of  difficulty,  councils  assembled  on 
invitation,  not  to  decide  and  determine  authorita- 
tively^ but  to  advise  the  church  how  to  decide  and 
determine  it;  and,^*  "however  fond  they  were  of 
the  power  of  presbyteries  in  the  church,  they  were 
very  opposite  to  the  power  of  classes,  councils,  and 
synods,  out  of  the  church ; "  that  Cotton  and  Da- 
venport wrote  largely  against  these  in  their  Answer 
to  Paget ;  and  that  churches  only,  and  not  the  advi- 
sory synods,  could  perfect  the  sentence  of  non- 
communion.  He  says  '^  that  "  no  church  was  here- 
ticated  for  not  receiving  the  result  of  synod."  That 
"  councils  are  to  advise  what  is  to  be  done,  and 
churches  to  do  what  is  to  be  done,"  was  the  opinion 
of  Hooker,  Chauncy,  Davenport,  and  Oakes.  He 
quotes  especially  from  Hooker's  Survey,  part  iv. 
page  47,  *  "  The  council's  determination  takes 
place,  not  because  they  concluded  so,  but  because 
the  churches  approve  of  what  they  determined." 
NeaP^  says,  Robinson  allowed  of  councils  for  ad- 
vice, but  "  not  for  exercising  authority  or  jurisdic- 
tion." Bliss,  in  his  History  of  Rehoboth,*^  shows 
that  the  parties  bound  themselves  beforehand  to 
abide  the  result  of  council  relative  to  the  dismission 
of  Mr.  Carnes  in  1763.  This  is  the  earliest  instance 
which  I  have  noticed,  save  the  cases  to  which  John 

•  Some  falsely  ascribe  the  fourth  part  of  this  work  to  Cotton. 
11 


122  COUNCILS. 

White  alludes  in  his  Lamentations  in  Wise's  Quar- 
rel, page  165.  —  See  Laws  of  New  England; 
Churches  discipline  each  other^  but  not  juridically ; 
Councils,  proper  objects  of;  Consociations  ;  Sy- 
nods. 

*  In  Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  9.  ^  Apology,  6.  ^  lb.  118.  lb. 
122—129.  ^  Page  133.  ''Page  45.  'Page  165.  "Page  167. 
^  Hist.  Conn.  i.  297.  '"  Survey,  part  i.  121.  "  Dudlean  Lect.  15. 
^'^  Pages  27—35.  "  Convention  Sermon,  46—48.  '*  lb.  59.  '^  lb. 
60.     >«  lb.  62.     17  N.  Eng.  i.  73.     ^^  Page  209. 

COUNCILS,  of  whom  composed.  —  John  Robin- 
son' maintained,  "that  it  was  not  orderly  that  the 
bodies  of  churches  should  be  sent  to  for  counsel, 
but  some  chief  persons.  Power  and  authority  is  in 
the  body  for  election  and  censures,  but  counsel  for 
direction  in  all  difficult  cases  in  some  few."  Ains- 
worth,  in  his  Answer  to  Clyfton,^  replies  to  an 
objection  to  sending  to  the  church  in  Leyden,  be- 
cause "they  were  in  the  same  case,"  by  saying, 
"  The  same  objection  could  have  been  brought  by 
the  church  in  Antioch  against  the  church  in  Jeru- 
salem." The  Independents  in  the  Westminster 
Assembly  °  argued  that  a  council  should  not  be 
selected  by  location,  but  by  agreement  of  the  trou- 
bled church  or  opposing  parties.  Increase  Mather  ^ 
says :  "  For  councils  to  take  it  upon  them  to  deter- 
mine, without  elders  and  messengers  from  the 
churches,  is  prelatical,  even  though  the  church  de- 
clares that  they  will  not  send  them."  And*  he 
asserts  that  it  belongs  not  to  ministers  to  direct  to 
whom  or  to  what  churches  aggrieved  persons  shall 
send  for  counsel.     He  shows®  that  ministers  sit  in 


COUNCILS.  123 

council  only  by  virtue  of  delegation  from  their 
churches.  In  his  Order  of  the  Churches  of  New 
England/  he  shows,  at  length,  that  the  brethren 
as  well  as  pastors  have  a  right  to  sit  in  councils. 
Samuel  Mather  ^  informs  us,  that,  in  the  synod  of 
1679,  certain  pastors  were  not  allowed  to  sit  till  they 
had  lay  delegates  to  sit  with  them.  John  Wise  ^ 
maintains  that  ministers  may  be  left  out  of  the 
choice  of  delegates  to  councils,  if  so  their  churches 
will.  From  Balch's  Vindication  of  the  Second 
Church  in  Bradford,  it  appears  ^°  that  the  church, 
about  1746,  sent  to  the  ministers  of  one  association 
with  their  churches  to  constitute  a  council.  The 
lette^r  of  the  Boston  ministers  to  the  distressed 
churches  in  Connecticut,  at  the  time  of  the  Episco- 
pal defection,  recommends  a  council,  impartial,  and 
not  confined  to  the  vicinity.  Mr.  Davenport"  was 
invited  to  sit  with  the  synod  at  Cambridge.  Up- 
ham,  in  his  Ratio  Disciplinae,^^  affirms  that  "  there 
does  not  appear  to  be  any  Congregational  authority 
whatever  for  the  particular  church  that  assembles 
the  council  to  invite  individuals  to  sit  and  act  in 
the  same,  in  their  own  persons  and  right,  and  not 
as  the  representatives  of  sister-churches."  If  this  is 
so,  and  I  find  nothing  either  in  principle  or  ancient 
precedent  to  contradict  it  (unless  the  case  of  Mr. 
Davenport  above  be  taken  as  an  exception),*  then, 
if  the  services  of  ex-pastors  or  others  are  specially 
needed  on  councils,  applications  should  be  made  to 
the  churches  of  which  they  are  members.  It  may 
be  asked.  If  councils  are  merely  advisory,  why  not 
•  See  references  to  Trumbull,  in  art.  Consociatioxs,  origin  of. 


124  COUNCILS. 

leave  the  parties  to  counsel  with  whom  they  choose  ? 
It  is  answered,  they  have  a  right  to  counsel  with 
whom  they  choose  for  mere  advice  ;  but,  if  it  be 
concerning  a  matter  involving  church  fellowship  and 
mutual  church  help,  then  there  are  certain  points 
of  propriety  to  be  regarded  in  choosing  a  council 
which  is  truly  ecclesiastical.  Increase  Mather'^ 
strenuously  maintains  that  it  is  not  necessary  or 
proper  to  confine  the  parties  to  the  nearest  churches, 
but  that  this  is  an  infringement  of  their  liberty. 
Mitchell,  in  his  Guide,^"^  says  they  are  usually  from 
the  same  neighborhood,  but  sometimes  from  places 
more  remote.  Cotton  Mather  ^^  shows  that,  in  his 
time,  thqre  was  usually  more  than  one  delegate  sent 
from  a  church,  —  the  pastor  nominating  one  or 
more,  and  the  church  adding  to  them  at  tlieir  elec- 
tion. From  one  to  six  delegates  ^^  were  chosen 
from  each  church  to  a  council  in  Dorchester  about 
1794.  Rev.  Dr.  Fiske,  of  New  Braintree,  informs 
the  compiler,  that  in  his  early  days  the  churches 
resented  being  limited  in  the  number  of  delegates 
they  were  requested  to  send  to  a  council.  The 
Boston  Synod  of  1662  say^^  that  they  should  be 
called  "  with  special  reference  to  those  churches 
which  by  providence  are  planted  in  a  convenient 
vicinity,  though  with  liberty^  reserved  icithout  offence, 
to  make  use  of  others,  as  the  nature  of  tbe  case,  or 
the  advantage  of  opportunity,  may  lead  thereunto." 
—  See  Councils,  pastors  sit  in,  by  virtue  of  their 
delegation;  Delegates.     • 

*  In  Punchard's  Hist.  360 ;    and  Han.  i.  448  ;  and  "Works,  iii, 
382.    *  Han.  i.  254.    3ib.ii.508.    "*  Dis.  on  Ecc.  Councils,  Preface. 


COUNCILS.  125 

»  lb.  33.  •  lb.  13—26.  '  Pages  83—90.  »  Apology,  117.  "  Quar. 
of  the  Churches  Esp.  144.  '°  Page  22.  "  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  149. 
'2  Pages  126,  127.  '^  Disquisition,  31.  »4  page  226.  ^=  Rat.  Dis. 
159, 160.  '^  Votes  of  the  Church  and  Ecc.  Council  in  Dorchester, 
21,  22.     "  Page  116. 

COUNCILS,  hoiv  chosen.  —  In  the  work  entitled 
Congregationalism  as  contained  in  the  Scriptures 
and  explained  by  the  Platform,  it  is  asserted  that  a 
council  should  1^  chosen,  one  half  by  each  party 
separate,  and  not  in  meeting  of  the  whole  body, 
which  would  give  the  minority  no  voice  in  the  selec- 
tion. The  answer  to  the  Hampshire  Narrative  * 
says :  "  It  is  a  universal  custom  for  the  church  to 
agree  with  the  candidate  what  churches  shall  con- 
stitute the  council."     So  Upham.^ 

>  Page  39.    «  Rat.  Dis.  189. 

COUNCILS,  hoiv  convened? — Mitchell '  describes 
the  method  now  practised,  by  letters  missive,  ask- 
ing for  a  pastor  and  delegate;  a  point  too  well 
understood  to  need  a  particular  illustration.  C. 
Mather^  also  describes  the  usual  method  in  his 
time,  varying  from  the  present  practice  only  in  the 
number  of  delegates  and  the  mode  of  their  nomi- 
nation.—  See  Councils,  of  iv horn  composed? 
»  Guide,  227.     =  Rat.  Dis.  159,  160. 

COUNCILS,  occasions  of.  —  Mitchell  *  enume- 
rates these  as  follows,  viz. :  Ordination,  dismission, 
and  deposition  of  ministers;  troublesome  cases  of 
discipline ;    dissensions    or   other   difficulties   in  a 

church,  which  the  church  itself  is  unable  or  indis- 

n* 


126  COUNCILS. 

posed  to  settle  ;  and,  in  general,  all  those  occasions 
which  require  the  advice  or  concurrent  action  of 
more  churches  than  one.  The  ancient  writers 
usually  described  the  occasions  o£  councils  in  such 
general  terms  as  these,  —  Where  a  church  wants 
either  light  or  peace.  See  Upham,  Rat.  Dis.  188, 
189 :  and  Punchard's  View,  114.  —  See  Councils, 
proper  objects  of* 

^  Guide,  226. 

# 

COUNCILS,  have  pastors  a  negative  vote  in  ?  — 
This  question  is  discussed  at  length  in  Increase 
Mather's  Disquisition  ;  ^  and,  though  he  had  then 
gone  over  to  favor  Consociationism,  he  was  still 
"  vehement  in  the  negative." —  See  Consociations, 
objections  to. 

»  Pages  7—13. 

COUNCILS,  pastors  sit  in,  by  virtue  of  their  de- 
legation, and  not  as  pastors.  —  Increase  Mather  * 
strenuously  maintains  this  ground,  and  hence  ar- 
gues that  they  have  no  negative  voice,  but  are  only 
equal  v/ith  other  delegates  of  the  churches.  He 
argues  the  point  at  length,  showing  that,  as  their 
power  is  only  consultative,  there  is  no  good  reason 
why  judicious  laymen  should  not  have  as  great  a 
voice  as  pastors.  The  opposite  of  this  doctrine 
had  been  set  up  about  this  time  by  the  authors  of 
the  proposals  for  a  consociation.^  In  his  Order  of 
the  Gospel  Justified,^  Dr.  Mather  says :  "  Not  their 
olfice,  but  their  delegation,  gives  them  powder  to  be 
members  of  synods ; . . .  none  ought  to  be  admitted 


COUNCILS.  127 

to  such  assemblies  but  those  whom  the  churches 
sh^  send.  .  .  .  So,  in  ecclesiastical  councils,  not 
only  the  officers  but  others  may  receive  a  commis- 
sion from  the  churches,  and  then  have  equal  power 
with  the  pastor."  Upham  *  says  there  does  not 
appear  to  be  any  congregational  authority  for  in- 
viting persons  to  sit  in  council  by  their  own  right, 
and  not  as  delegates  of  councils.  —  See  Dele- 
gates. 

*  Disquisition,  13 — 26.     ^  Wise's  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Es- 
poused, 159.    3  Page  86.    ■*  Rat.  Dis.  sect.  84. 


COUNCILS,  ex  parte.— Cotton  Mather  says:' 
"  The  churches  of  New  England  have  a  remedy 
for  oppression,  that  is  to  say,  a  council.  If  the 
church  refuse  to  call  a  council,  the  aggrieved  may 
do  it  without  them,  only  informj^ig  them  what 
he  does."  He  describes  the  mode  of  procedure  of 
such  a  council,^  and  says :  "  If  they  find  the  p>erson 
to  have  suffered  palpable  injury,  they  endeavor  to 
convince  the  church.  If  the  church  refuse,  they 
order  that  the  person  be  admitted  to  some  other 
church  in  the  neighborhood,  and  so  to  communion 
with  th^m  all."  He  says''  that  churches  thus  per- 
sisting run  a  risk  of  a  withdrawal  of  fellowship,  by 
a  ratification  by  the  churches  which  sent  their  dele- 
gates to  the  council.  He  asserts,  moreover,'*  that 
a  council  may  be  called  by  a  neighbor-church, 
applied  to  by  the  aggrieved  party.  S.  Mather* 
informs  us  that  this  calling  a  council  by  another 
church,  on  application  of  the  aggrieved,  was  the 
only  way  known  in  his  day  in  which  testimony 


128  COVENANT 

might  be  borne  against  mal-administration  in 
any  particular  church.  See  Upham's  Rat.  J)is. 
197-^204;  Punchard's  View,  112,  266;  Bacon's 
Church  Manual,  143—145. 

1  Eat.  Dis.  158.  ^  Paggg  159—162.  Page  161.  *  Page  162. 
^  Apology,  139. 

COUNCILS,  are  they  beneficial  ?  —  Whoever 
wishes  to  see  the  full  arguments  for  the  affirmative 
of  this  question,  should  consult  Increase  Mather's 
Disquisition  on  Ecclesiastical  Councils,  throughout. 

COUNCILS  have  no  poiver  to  enforce  creeds.  — 
This  is  demonstrated  in  Watts's  Christian  Church, 
in  his  Complete  Works,  vol.  iii. 

COUNCILS  ^pire  when  they  have  given  the  advice 
for  which  they  were  called.  —  Hon.  S.  Haven,  Pro- 
ceedinofs  of  First  Church  and  Parish  in  Dedham, 
52.  See  the  Fiske  case  in  Salem,  under  the  head 
Churches  discipline  each  other,  for  an  early  innova- 
tion on  this  important  Congregational  rule.  Up- 
ham,  in  his  Rat.  Dis.  sect.  157,  represents  re-assem- 
bling, or  doing  other  business  than  that  for  which 
they  were  called,  as  "  at  variance  with  Congre- 
gational principles."  —  For  the  whole  subject  of 
councils,  see  Appeals,  Synods. 

COVENANT,  what?— This  was  held  by  the 
early  Congregational  writers  to  be  that  which  con- 
stitutes a  church,  and  a  person  a  member  of  a 
Christian  church.     They  held  that  it  ought  to  be 


COVENANT.  129 

explicit,  but  might  be  implied.  (See  Church, 
ivhat  constitutes  ?)  The  advocates  both  of  a  na- 
tional and  a  catholic  visible  church  accused  the 
Congregationalists  of  unwarrantable  strictness  on 
this  point.  Thomas  Goodwin,  in  his  Letters  to 
John  Goodwin,  says :  *  "  The  church  covenant  is  no 
more  with  us  than  this,  —  an  agreement  and  reso- 
lution, professed  with  promise  to  walk  in  all  those 
ways  pertaining  to  this  fellowship,  so  far  as  they 
shall  be  revealed  to  them  in  the  gospel.  Thus 
briefly  and  indefinitely  and  implicitly,  and  in  such 
like  words  and  no  other,  do  we  apply  ourselves  to 
men's  consciences,  not  obtruding  upon  them  the 
mention  of  any  one  particular  before  or  in  admis- 
sion, .  .  .  leaving  their  spirits  free  to  the  entertain- 
ment of  the  light  that  shines  or  shall  shine  on  them 
and  us  out  of  the  word."  Daniel  Buck,  a  member 
of  the  church  organized  in  London  in  1592,  de- 
clared,^ on  his  arraignment  before  three  magistrates, 
that  when  he  came  into  the  congregation  "  he 
made  this  protestation,  that  he  would  walk  with  the 
rest  of  the  congregation,  so  long  as  they  would 
walk  in  the  way  of  the  Lord,  and  as  far  as  might  be 
warranted  by  the  word  of  God."  Burton,  in  his 
Rejoinder  to  Prynne's  Answer  concerning  the 
Twelve  Considerable  Questions,^  maintains  that  it 
is  enough  that  there  be  a  covenant  either  expressed 
or  implied.  Cotton'*  shows  that  a  covenant  may 
be  '•  by  silent  consent.  Gen.  xvii.  2 ;  by  express 
words,  Ex.  xix.  8 ;  or  by  writing  and  sealing,  Neh. 
ix.  38."  Cotton  Mather  says,*  that,  in  an  Apology 
of  Justin  Martyr,  we  find  Christians,  who  were  ad- 


130  COVENANT. 

mitted  into  church  fellowship,  agreeing  in  a  resolu- 
tion to  conform  in  all  things  to  the  word  of  God ; 
which  seems  to  be  as  truly  a  church  covenant  as 
any  in  the  churches  of  New  England.  In  the  or- 
ganization of  the  Salem  Church,  Mr.  Higginson 
drew  up  a  covenant*  and  confession  of  faith;  and 
those  who  were  afterward  admitted  were  required 
"to  enter  into  alike  covenant-engagement  as  to  the 
substance^  but  the  manner  was  to  be  so  ordered  by 
the  elders  as  to  be  most  conducive  to  the  end, 
respect  being'  always  had  by  them  to  the  liberty  and 
ability  of  the  person."  ^  Congregationalism  as  con- 
tained in  the  Scriptures,  &c.'^  quotes  from  Hooker's 
Survey,  part.  i.  46 :  "  This  covenant  may  be  either 
explicit  or  implicit;  explicit  where  there  is  a  formal 
covenant,  implicit  where  they  practise  without  a 
verbal  written  formal  covenant."  This  covenant, 
he  maintains,  is  for  life  as  essentially  as  is  the 
marriage-covenant.  Prince  ^  quotes  Gov.  Bradford : 
"  Upon  which  these  people  shake  off  their  antichris- 
tian  bondage,  and,  as  the  Lord's  free  people,  join 
themselves  by  covenant  in  a  church  state,  to  walk 
in  all  his  w^ays,  made  known  or  to  be  made  knoivn  to 
them^  according  to  their  best  endeavors,  whate\rer  it 
cost  them."  Thus  it  seems  that  covenants  were 
originally  the  basis  of  Congregational  church  orga- 
nizations, and  that  with  regard  to  the  substance^  and 
not  the  words  of  them.  Many  of  the  old  writers, 
particularly  Goodwin,  show  that  a  covenant,  ex- 
pressed or  implied,  is  absolutely  necessary  to  the 
establishment  of  any  society  whatever.  Formulas 
*  It  is  given  in  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  300. 


CREEDS.  131 

of  doctrine,  as  a  test  of  admission,  were  of  much 
later  origin,  as  will  appear  under  the  next  article. 
A  laconic  covenant  of  the  ancient  Independent 
Church  in  Wattesfield,  Suffolk,  may  be  found  in 
Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  179,  note. —  Further  illustrations 
of  the  general  subject  may  also  be  found  in  Han- 
bury,  i.  85 ;  ii.  309—314 ;  iii.  76. 

1  Page  44.  s  In  Punehard's  Hist.  277,  278.  =  Page  25.  ^'Way 
of  the  Churches,  3.  »  Rat.  Dis.  12.  ^  Hubbard's  Hist.  Mass.  119, 
120.     "^  Pages  7,  8.    "  Chronology,  4. 

CREEDS,  should  they  he  a  binding  rule  of  faith 
and  practice^  and  a  test  for  admission  to  the  churches  ? 
Richard  Mather  *  says :  "  They  may  have  a  platform 
by  way  of  profession  of  their  faith,  but  not  a  bind- 
ing rule  of  faith  and  practice.  ...  If  so,  then  they 
ensnare  men  attending  more  to  the  form  of  doc- 
trine delivered  from  the  authority  of  the  church  .  .  . 
than  to  the  examining  thereof  according  to  the 
Scriptures."  Required  subscription  was  the  parent 
of  English  Independency.  Burton,  in  his  Rejoin- 
der to  Prynne's  Reply  to  his  Answer  to  Twelve 
Considerable  Questions,  says:^  "It  is  the  greatest 
possible  tyranny  over  men's  souls  to  make  other 
men's  judgments  the  rule  of  my  conscience."  Tho- 
mas Goodwin,  in  his  letter  to  John  Goodwin,^  is 
equally  explicit  on  this  point;*  so  is  Hubbard,  in 
his  History  of  Massachusetts.^!  Neal,  in  his  Puri- 
tans,* represents  the  chief  error  of  the  Brovvnists  to 
be  their  unchurching  all  other  churches.  Gibbon, 
in  his  Decline  and  Fall,^  says  the  churches  of  the 

•  See  extract  from  this  letter  in  the  preceding  article,    t  See  ib. 


132  CRKEDS. 

Roman  empire  "were  united  only  by  the  ties  of 
faith  and  charity."  Hanbury  ^  says  of  the  Confes- 
sion of  the  Low  Country  Exiles,  it  was  transmitted 
to  the  authorities  at  home,  not  with  "  any  expecta- 
tion that  it  should  be  erected  into  a  standard.  If 
they  entertained,  however,  any  such  modes  of  fixing 
religious  belief,  time  has  shown  their  utter  futility 
for  that  purpose.  .  .  .  The  unadulterated  word  of 
God  shall  stand  for  ever."  J.  Cotton,  in  his  An- 
swer to  Ball,  says :  ^  "  When  a  church  is  suspected 
and  slandered  with  corrupt  and  unsound  doctrine, 
they  have  a  call  from  God  to  set  forth  a  public 
confession  of  their  faith ;  but  to  prescribe  the  same 
as  the  confession  of  faith  of  that  church  to  their 
posterity,  or  the  prescribed  confession  of  faith  of 
one  church  to  be  a  form  and  pattern  unto  others, 
sad  experience  has  showed  what  a  snare  it  has 
been  to  both."  Even  Herle,  in  his  controversy 
with  Mather  and  Tompson,^  disclaims  "  such  a  fan 
to  purge  the  religious  floor  with,  and  setting  the 
SUN  BY  THE  DIAL."  The  Apologctical  Narrative  of 
the  Independents  in  the  Westminster  Assembly  *° 
asserts  that  their  rules  of  admission  were  such  "  as 
would  take  in  any  member  of  Christ.  We  took 
measure  of  no  man's  holiness  by  his  opinions,  whe- 
ther concurring  with  us  or  adverse  from  us."  Baillie, 
in  his  Letters  to  Spang,  says:"  "Thomas  Good- 
win, at  that  meeting,  declared  that  he  cannot  refuse 
to  be  members,  nor  censure  when  members,  any  for 
Anabaptism,  Lutheranism,  or  any  errors  which  are 
not  fundamental  and  maintained  against  know- 
ledge."    The  same  principles  are  advanced  by  Cot- 


CREEDS.  133 

ton,  in  his  Holiness  of  Church  Members ;  ^'  in  the 
preface  to  the  Savoy  Confession ;  ^'  and  by  the  Con- 
gregational Union  of  England  and  Wales,**  as  late 
as  the  year  1833.  Lord  King  **  gives  various  forms 
of  ancient  creeds,  and  says  they  were  handed  down 
from  father  to  son,  not  in  the  precise  words,  but 
varying,  and  never  repeated  in  the  same  words, 
even  by  the  same  father.  John  Owen  ^^  says :  "  We 
will  never  deny  the  communion  to  any  person  whose 
duty  it  is  to  desire  it."  Samuel  Mather  shows  *^ 
that  all  Christians  ought  to  be  admitted  to  any  of 
Christ's  churches.  Cotton  Mather  says:'^  "The 
churches  of  New  England  make  only  vital  piety 
the  terms  of  communion  among  them;  and  they 
all,  with  delight,  see  godly  Congregationalists,  Pres- 
byterians, Episcopalians,  Anti-pedobaptists,  and 
Lutherans,  all  members  of  the  same  churches^  and 
sitting  together  without  offence  in  the  same  holy 
mountain,  at  the  same  holy  table."  Speaking  of 
the  use  then  made  of  creeds,  he  says*^  of  candi- 
dates for  admission :  "  To  the  relation  of  his  reli- 
gious experience  is  added  either  a  confession  of 
faith  of  the  person's  own  composing,  or  a  briefer 
intimation  of  what  publicly-received  confession  he 
chooses  to  adhere  to."  He  says :  ^°  "  It  is  the  de- 
sign of  these  churches  to  make  the  terms  of  com- 
munion run  as  parallel  as  may  be  with  the  terms 
of  salvation.  A  charitable  consideration  of  nothing 
but  true  piety,  in  admitting  to  evangelical  privileges, 
is  a  glory  which  the  churches  of  New  England 
would  lay  claim  to."  Dr.  Watts,  in  his  Terms  of 
Christian  Communion,^^  shows  that  the  churches 
12 


134  CREEDS. 

may  not  appoint  new  rules  of  admission ;  as  a  ge- 
neral rule  should  admit  all  who  make  a  credible 
profession  of  religion;  exclude  no  sheep  of  the  fold, 
and  admit  no  unclean  beast ;  take  heed  not  to 
make  the  door  of  admission  larger  or  straiter  than 
Christ  made  it;  and  that  nothing  be  in  their  cove- 
nant but  what  is  essential  to  common  Christianity. 
He  has  a  list"  of  substantial  articles,  all  very  fun- 
damental, save  that  of  the  mode  and  subjects  of 
baptism,  which  he  argues  (whether  consistently  or 
no)  is  fundamental  to  the  peace  of  the  church. 
And  he  shows  ^^  that  the  Christian  church  flou- 
rished more  than  a  hundred  years  without  any  set 
creeds,  and  argues  their  utter  insufficiency,  because 
they  often  have  the  assent  neither  of  the  head  nor 
the  heart.  So  late  as  1801,  Dr.  Worcester's  church 
in  Fitch  burg  say,  in  defence  of  their  creed, ^*  if  the 
candidate  dissented  from  any  article,  and  it  did 
not  appear  to  result  from  enmity  to  the  truth,  he 
was  admitted;  "for  it   was  never  dcsigned   to 

EXCLUDE  ANY  FROM  COMMUNION  WHO  APPEAR  TO  BE 
REAL    SUBJECTS  OF  EXPERIMENTAL    RELIGION."        Tho- 

mas  Goodwin"  shows  that  we  are  to  bear  with 
Christians  for  the  sake  of  Christ  that  is  in  them, 
and  therefore  tolerate  them  as  Christians,  but  con- 
tend earnestly  for  the  faith.  Dr.  Kippis,  in  his 
Vindication  of  Dissenting  Ministers,  says :  ~®  "  We 
dissent  because  we  deny  the  right  of  any  body  of 
men,  whether  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  to  impose  hu- 
man creeds,  tests,  or  articles  ;  and  because  we 
think  it  our  duty  not  to  submit  to  any  such  impo- 
sition, but  to  protest  against  it  as  a  violation  of 


CREEDS.  135 

our  essential  liberty  to  judge  and  act  for  ourselves 
in  matters  of  religion."  He  adds :  ^'^  "  They  will 
not  subscribe  to  human  forms,  which  themselves 
believe,  when  such  formularies  are  pressed  upon 
them  by  an  incompetent  and  usurped  authority." 
He  shows  ^^  that  ministers,  believers  in  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity,  voted  that  no  human  com- 
position or  interpretation  of  that  doctrine  should 
be  made  a  part  of  the  Articles  of  Advice  in  1719. 
Plymouth  Church  ^^  covenanted  "  to  walk  in  a 
church  state,  in  all  God's  ways  made  known  or  to 
be  made  known  to  them.  They  reserved  an  entire 
perpetual  liberty  of  searching  the  inspired  records, 
and  forming  both  their  principles  and  practices  from 
those  discoveries  they  should  make  therein,  without 
imposing  them  on  others."  This  appears  from  their 
original  covenant  in  1602."'  Milford  Church,  Conn., 
founded  in  1640,  had  a  covenant ;  but  no  mention 
is  made  of  any  confession  of  faith.  New  Haven 
and  Guilford  had  a  doctrine  of  faith,  short,  compre- 
hensive, and  highly  Calvinistical.^^  The  original 
covenant  of  the  First  Church  in  Boston,  after  the 
preamble,  is  simply  this:^^  "Do  solemnly  and  deli- 
berately, as  in  Christ's  holy  presence,  bind  ourselves 
to  walk,  in  all  our  ways,  according  to  the  rule  of 
the  gospel,  in  all  sincere  conformity  to  his  holy  or- 
dinances, and  in  mutual  love  and  respect  to  each 
other,  so  far  as  God  shall  give  us  grace."  Every 
member  wrote  his  own  confession  in  his  own  way, 
and  to  the  satisfaction  of  those  who  received  him 
into  their  fellowship.  At  first  the  churches  of  New 
England  were  usually  constituted  with   no   other 


136  CREEDS. 

form  than  a  covenant.  The  author  of  Seasonable 
Thouo^hts  on  Creeds  and  Articles  of  Faith  as  Reli- 
gious  Tests,  asks  : "  "  Do  not  the  framers  and  advo- 
cates  of  creeds,  as  tests  of  orthodoxy  and  Christian 
communion,  seem  to  confess  that  they  are  not  satis- 
fied with  the  Bible  on  this  subject?  ...  If  creeds 
are  necessary  to  guard  against  heretics,  the  Bible  is 
not  a  sufficient  rule.  .  .  .  Do  they  operate,  have  they 
operated,  or  are  they  likely  ever  to  operate,  as  an 
effectual  preventive  to  unprincipled  and  heretical 
men  gaining  admission  into  a  Christian  church  ?  " 
He  seems,  in  the  sequel,  to  misapply  these  just  sen- 
timents, to  advocate  receiving  such  as  build  not  on 
the  Christian  foundation.  Dr.  Eckley  shows  ^*  that 
if  creeds  could  be  made  perfect,  then  nothing  would 
be  necessary  but  to  learn  the  creed.  Foxcroft,  in 
his  Century  •Sermon,^'^  says :  "  The  Congregation- 
alists  were  for  having  the  rule  of  Christianity  be  the 
rule  of  conformity."  Morton,  in  his  New  England 
Memorial,  says  :  °^  "  Higginson's  Confession  of 
Faith  and  Covenant  was  acknowledged  07il//  as  a 
direction  pointing  to  that  faith  and  covenant  con- 
tained in  the  Holy  Scriptures;  and  therefore  no 
man  was  confined  to  that  form  of  words,  but  only  to 
the  substance  and  scope  of  the  matter  contained 
therein  ;  and,  for  the  circumstantial  manner  of  join- 
ing the  church,  it  was  ordered  according  to  the  wis- 
dom and  faithfulness  of  the  elders,  together  with 
the  liberty  and  ability  of  any  person.  Hence  it  was 
that  some  were  admitted  by  expressing  their  consent 
to  that  written  confession  of  faith  and  covenant ; 
others  did  answer  questions  about  the  principles  of 


CREEDS.  137 

religion,  that  were  publicly  propounded  to  them ; 
soim  did  present  their  confession  in  writing,  which 
was  read  for  them ;  and  some^  that  were  able  and 
willing,  did  make  their  own  confession,  in  their  own 
words  and  way."  Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,^^ 
shows  very  minutely  that  profession  of  faith  was 
made  either  by  question  and  answer  or  else  by 
solemn  speech,  as  to  the  sum  and  tenor  of  the 
Christian  faith  laid  down  in  the  Scriptures,  the  of- 
ficers in  the  church,  and  their  duties.  Such  is  the 
evidence  of  one  who  complained  of  their  too  great 
strictness,  because  they  required  evidence  of  experi- 
mental religion.  He  spoke  that  which  he  knew, 
and  testified  that  he  had  seen.  Such  testimonies, 
it  would  seem,  ought  to  set  for  ever  at  rest  the 
notion  that  Higginson's  Confession  of  Faith  was 
used  as  a  constitution  of  the  church  and  a  test  of 
admission.  John  Corbett  says :  ^^  "  We  need  no 
human  addition  to  sacred  things,  nor  any  mutable 
circumstances  to  be  terms  of  fellowship."  Cotton 
Mather,  in  his  Letter  to  Lord  Barrington,^^  says: 
"  No  church  on  earth  so  notably  makes  the  terms 
of  communion  run  parallel  with  the  terms  of  salva- 
tion. The  only  declared  basis  of  union  among 
them  is  that  vital  piety  in  which  all  good  men,  of 
different  names,  are  united."  Robinson-  reminds 
the  Plymouth  immigrants,  on  parting,'*"  that  it  is 
an  article  of  their  church  covenant  "  to  be  ready  to 
receive  whatever  of  truth  shall  be  made  known  to 
them  from  the  written  word  of  God."  The  Rev. 
C.  Upham  shows  ^^  that  it  is  a  fundamental  prin- 
ciple of  Congregationalism  not  to  impose  a  test, 

12* 


138  CRI'F,1).>. 

which  may  not  he  complied  with  by  all  sincere 
Christians.  In  a  similar  manner  argue  Dr.  West 
(Anniversary  Plymouth  Sermon,  58,  59),  President 
Stiles  (Convention  Sermon,  45),  John  Howe 
( Works,  459,  931),  and  Mauduit  (Case  of  Dissent- 
ing Ministers,  34,  35).  It  is  not,  however,  the  use 
of  creeds,  but  making  them  separate  acknowledged 
Christians,  which  our  fathers  condemned.  Their 
confessions  were  orthodox  explicit  manifestoes,  not 
tests  of  admission.  Some  churches  at  this  day 
have  similar  creeds,  but  require  assent  only  to  the 
substance  of  them ;  while  others,  making  tests  of 
their  creeds,  have  frittered  them  down  to  the  stan- 
dard of  those  weakest  in  the  faith.  Few  churches 
have  too  high  a  standard  of  admission,  but  it 
should  consist  only  in  true  faith  and  vital  god- 
liness. Mr.  Mitchell  says:^^  "  Congregationalists 
object  to  creeds  being  used  as  tests,  or  set  up  as 
standards  to  enforce  uniformity.  ...  As  articles  of 
peace  and  bonds  of  union,  we  fear  they  create 
divisions  as  often  as  they  prevent  them;"  and, 
speaking  of  some  "  who  think  that  heaven  and  earth 
should  pass,  rather  than  one  jot  or  tittle  of  the  exact 
wording  of  the  prescribed  creed  ...  be  not  fulfilled," 
he  says:  "Any  brother  that  offends  in  one  point 
they  hold'to  be  guilty  of  all,  and  obnoxious  to  eccle- 
siastical censure.  They  put  their  strait-jacket  upon 
the  limbs  of  Charity,  who  loves  freedom  as  she  loves 
truth,  and  make  their  narrow  views  the  jail-limits, 
within  which  she  walks  afflicted  and  confined." 

Upham,  in  his  Ratio  Disciplinae,  says:^^  "None 
of  these  various  sects  [among  which  he  has  enume- 


CREEDS.  139 

rated  Congregationalists],  so  far  as  known,  is  des- 
titute of  an  authorized  and  settled  constitution ; 
each  of  them  embodying  what  it  conceives  to  be 
the  sense  of  Scripture  in  certain  articles  of  faith,  .  .  . 
which  the  individual  members  are  in  general  not 
at  liberty  to  disregard."  And  the  Congregational 
Manual  **  says :  "  The  instrument  by  which  indi- 
vidual believers  are  constituted  one  body  in  a 
church  is  a  Confession  of  Faitli,^^  (See  Church, 
what  constitutes  ?)  Bellamy,  in  his  Letters  to  Scrip- 
turista,^*  maintains  the  right  of  test-creeds,  because 
it  is  matter  what  people  believe.  If  men  change 
their  views,  they  should  honestly  declare  it.  True ; 
but  should  we  test  and  reject  men  who  appear  to 
be  Christians,  because  they  agree  not  to  our  expo- 
sitions of  portions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures?  An- 
drew Fuller,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  Polity,^®  argues 
for  test-creeds,  on  the  ground  that  individuals  and 
society  have  a  right  to  form  their  own  connections 
with  those  with  whom  they  agree  in  views.  But 
the  premise  is  denied  in  this  case,  because  Christ 
has  given  the  injunction,  —  "Him  that  is  weak  in 
the  faith  receive  ye."  Professor  Pond,  in  his  Trea- 
tise on  the  Church,*^  argues  in  the  same  strain  as 
do  Bellamy  and  Fuller.  —  See  Dr.  Bacon's  Church 
Manual,  22 — 28.     See  Fundamentals,  Members. 

»  Church  Gov.  64.  *  Page  19.  ^  Pages  44,  45.  "  Pages  119, 
120.  »  Vol.  i.  150.  8  In  Han.  i.  7.  '  lb.  98.  •  lb.  ii.  162.  »  lb. 
166,  167.  »"  lb.  225.  »»  lb.  658.  "  lb.  iii.  401.  "  lb.  621. 
"  lb.  698.  »*  Enquiry,  part  ii.  67—67.  '"  In  Hall's  Puritans  and 
their  Principles,  295.  "  Apology,  34,  and  elsewhere.  "  Rat. 
Dis.  Introduct.  4.  >9  Page  88.  ^  Page  90.  "  Works,  iii.  236— 
250.   "  Pages  258—262.    ^  Page  265.    «*  Facts  and  Documents,  8. 


140  DANCING. 

2'  Ch.  Gov.  book  vii.  chap.  12.  =6  page  29.  ^7  pgge  30.  «»  Pages 
34,  57.  2"  Prince's  Chronology,  4.  =^°  lb.  89.  ^i  Lambert's  Hist. 
New  Haven,  101,  164.  ^'  Art.  John  Cotton,  in  N.  Englander, 
Aug.  1850,  p.  412.  '■^■^  Pages  8,  9.  '■^^  Dudlean  Lect.  23.  ^'=  Page  9. 
^'^  Page  146.  ^'  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  iii.  68.  ^^  Princip. 
and  Pract.  of  Several  Nonconformists,  2.  ^^  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i. 
vol.  i.  19.  *'^  Upham's  Dedicat.  Serm.  29.  ^»  Century  Serm.  56. 
42  Guide,  53,  54.  «  page  35.  ^4  page  26.  "5  Works,  i.  371—390 ; 
and  Doctrinal  Tract  Society's  edition,  i.  597 — 613.  ^^  Works,  ii. 
629.  630.     *^  Pages  23—27,  and  Appendix,  note  C. 

DANCING.  —  Neal  ^  notes,  among  the  anti- 
puritan  movements  after  the  Restoration,  that  "in- 
terludes, masquerades  and  promiscuous  dancing, 
profane  swearing,  drunkenness,  and  a  universal 
dissolution  of  manners,  were  connived  at,  and  the 
very  name  of  godliness  became  a  reproach.  —  See 
Amusements. 

*  Hist,  of  the  Puritans,  ii.  247. 

D.  D.  —  Dr.  Owen  ^  declares  that  he  did  not  use 
the  title,  save  out  of  respect  to  the  university  which 
conferred  it,  nor  till  some  were  offended  because 
he  left  it  off;  and  it  is  found  that  most  who  have 
received  it  since,  feel  the  same  great  respect  for  the 
good  judgment  and  just  discrimination  of  those 
who  confer  it ;  while  the  class  of  expectants  are 
very  mute,  and  the  rest  are  perplexed  with  the 
meaning  of  Rabbi  in  Matt,  xxiii.  8,  finding  no  Rabbi 
to  expound  it  to  their  mind.  They  are,  therefore, 
reminded  of  the  fable  of  the  Fox  and  the  Grapes. 
R.  Williams^  is  violent  against  them,  as  vain  titles, 
and  calling  men  Father  and  Rabbi. 

*  In  Han.  iii.  473.    '^  Hireling  Ministry  none  of  Christ's,  15> 


DEACONS.  141 

DEACONS,  their  office.  —  Goodwin,  in  his  Cate- 
chism,* shows  at  length  that  this  is  to  take  care  of 
the  temporal  affairs  of  the  church,  particularly  re- 
ceiving and  distributing  of  alms ;  and  not  without  a 
separate  appointment  to  preach  the  word,  as  Philip 
did  after  God  called  him  to  be  an  evangelist. 
Hooker,  in  his  Survey,^  demonstrates  the  same  doc- 
trine, and  shows  also  that  it  is  appropriate  to  their 
office  to  provide  the  elements  for  the  Lord's  table, 
and  also  to  see  that  each  member  of  the  church 
contribute  his  due  share,  and  bring  delinquents  to 
censure.  John  Owen,  in  his  Catechism,'  asserts  their 
duties  to  be  to  take  care  of  the  poor,  receive  col- 
lections, and  distribute  alms.  Cotton  Mather  says  * 
that  it  is  "to  relieve  the  pastors  of  all  the  tempo- 
ral affairs  of  the  church."  Mitchell  *  describes  their 
duties  to  be  to  receive  and  distribute  the  alms  of 
the  church ;  to  distribute  the  bread  and  wine  at  the 
Lord's  Supper ;  to  act,  in  some  respects,  as  assist- 
ants and  substitutes  to  the  pastor.  He  says :  "  In 
the  pastor's  absence,  they  preside  at  the  meetings 
of  the  church  ;  and,  when  there  is  no  preacher,  they 
conduct  its  worship."  These  last  duties  were,  in 
earlier  times,  held  appropriate  to  ruling  elders. 
Punchard  ^  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  senior  deacon 
to  preside  in  the  absence  of  the  pastor.  Owen,  in 
his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  ix,,'^  says  that 
a  deacon  has  no  authority  to  rule,  i.e.  preside  in  a 
church.  Cambridge  Platform^  defines  their  office 
and  work  to  be  "to  receive  the  offerings  of  the 
church,  gifts  given  to  the  church,  and  to  keep 
the  treasury  of  the  church,  and  therewith  to  serve 


142  DEACONS. 

the  tables,  which  the  church  is  to  provide  for ;  as  the 
Lord's  table,  the  table  of  the  ministers,  and  of  such 
as  are  in  necessity,  to  whom  they  are  to  distribute 
in  simplicity."  The  king's  book,  drawn  up  by 
bishops  and  divines  in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign 
of  Henry  VIII.  admits  "  that  their  office,  in  the 
primitive  church,  was  partly  to  administer  meat  and 
other  necessaries  to  the  poor,  and  partly  to  minister 
to  the  bishops  and  priests."  Foxcroft,  in  his  sermon 
at  the  ordination  of  a  deacon,  says  ^  the  design 
of  deacons  is  to  provide  for  the  Lord's  table,  the 
minister's  support,  and  the  poor  saints.  Churches 
should  furnish  them  with  the  means  of  distributing 
to  the  necessity  of  saints ;  otherwise  the  choice  of 
them  is  solemn  mockery.  John  Webb,  in  his  Ser- 
mon at  the  Ordination  of  a  Deacon,  maintains  ^" 
that  they  are  to  provide  for  the  table  of  the  Lord, 
of  the  ministers,  and  the  poor.  It  is  no  part  of  their 
work  either  to  preach  or  baptize.  Dr.  Dwight  ^^ 
maintains  that  they  are  to  be  assistants  to  the 
ministers,  which  he  argues  from  Paul's  directions, 
the  nature  of  their  office,  and  ecclesiastical  history  ; 
moderators  of  the  church  in  the  absence  of  the 
minister ;  to  distribute  the  sacramental  emblems 
(anciently  they  also  carried  them  to  those  that  were 
absent),  and  to  distribute  the  alms  of  the  church. 
Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his  Divine  Institution  of  Congre- 
gational Churches,  says  :  ^'  "  He  that  ministers  to 
the  external  concerns  of  the  church  is  a  deacon.  .  .  . 
There  may  be  one  or  more,  as  the  concerns  of  the 
church  are."  —  See  Punchard's  View,  92 — 102 ; 
Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  74—78. 


DEACONS.  143 

*  Pages  25—27.  *  Part  ii.  37,  38.  '  Works,  xix.  538.  •*  Rat. 
Dis.  128.  »  Guide,  171.  •  View,  170.  '  Works,  xx.  524.  "  Chap. 
vii.  sect.  ii.  •  Pages  14,  37.  *"  Pages  3—5.  ^'  Works,  Serm.  civ. 
"  Page  62. 

DEACONS,  their  qualifications  and  induction.  — 
John  Owen,  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  iv.^ 
shows  that  they  are  an  institution  of  apostolical 
power  from  Christ ;  that  they  are  to  be  chosen  by 
the  people  :  and  their  necessary  qualifications  are 
to  be  of  honest  report,  and  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  of  wisdom.  John  Webb,  in  his  Sermon  at  the 
Ordination  of  a  Deacon,'^  maintains  that  they  are 
to  be  introduced  to  their  office  by  the  suffrage  of 
the  brethren  and  prayer.  T.  Foxcroft,  in  his  Ser- 
mon at  such  an  ordination,  says  ^  that  the  practice 
was  then  (1731)  almost  extinct.  Dr.  Dwight  *  dis- 
cusses the  subject  at  length,  maintaining  that  they 
are  to  be  chosen  by  a  vote  of  the  church,  and 
ordained  by  the  imposition  of  hands.  They  must 
be  grave,  sincere,  temperate,  free  from  avarice,  ac- 
quainted with  and  heartily  attached  to  the  doctrines 
of  the  gospel ;  of  a  fair  Christian  reputation,  the 
husbands  of  one  wife,  and  ruling  their  families  well. 
See  Punchard,  View,  92—101,  167 ;  Upham,  Rat. 
Dis.  74—79  ;  Owen,  Works,  xix.  538. 

'  Works,  XX.  412.     -  Page  13.     =*  Page  3.     "»  Works,  Serm.  civ. 

DEACONS,  luhat  they  '•''purchase "  in  a  '''•good  de- 
greed—  Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,* 
shows  that  it  does  not  mean  that  they  may  preach, 
unless  by  virtue  of  a  new  office,  as  that  of  a  dea- 
con is  defined.     (See  Preach,  who  may?)     Watts, 


144  DEDICATIONS. 

in  his  Foundation  of  a  Christian  Church,^  says: 
"  They  obtain  a  good  degree  of  honor  and  respect, 
knowledge  and  graces,  and  a  good  step  towards  th*e 
office  of  ruling  or  teaching  elder."  T.  Hooker^ 
says  that  one  of  the  first  inlets  to  the  Man  of  Sin 
was  to  lift  up  a  deacon  above  his  place.  He  shows 
that  a  "  good  degree  "  means  a  good  standing  in 
the  church,  and  that  a  deaconship  is  no  necessary 
preparation  for  the  ministry.  Foxcroft,  in  his  Ser- 
mon at  the  Ordination  of  a  Deacon,^  says,  if  bishops 
and  deacons  are  two  orders  of  ministers,  why  are 
we  able  to  produce  a  divine  commission  for  but 
one  of  them?  Cotton  Mather*  supposes  that  the 
passage,  1  Tim.  iii.  13,  means  (as  he  says  some 
critics  read)  seats  of  eminence  in  the  church. 
Hence,  probably,  was  the  origin  of  the  deacons' 
seats  in  the  old  meeting-houses.  They  were  seats 
of  honor. 

*  Works,  XX.  529.  '  Works,  iii.  315.  '  Survey,  part  ii.  35,  36. 
*  Page  9.    *  Rat.  Dis.  130. 

DEACONS'  WIVES.  —  Cotton  Mather  says : ' 
"'Tis  often  inquired,  when  deacons  are  chosen, 
whether  their  wives  are  such  as  directed  ;  but  there 
is  a  mistake  about  the  meaning  of  the  text  in 
1  Tim.  iii.  11.  It  is  gunaikes^  women,  i.  e,  the  dea- 
conesses or  widows;  and  there  is  not  there  one 
word  about  deacons'  wives  any  more  than  the  pas- 
tors'. 

*  Rat.  Dis.  131. 

DEDICATIONS.  —  The  Waldenses,  in  one  of 
their  early  confessions,*   say :   "  So  many  supersti- 


DEDICATIONS.  145 

tious  dedications  of  churches  .  .  .  are  diabolical  in- 
ventions." Goodwin '  says  Christ  gives  many- 
directions  about  the  public  prayers  of  the  church, 
—  not  in  places  dedicated  as  holy,  with  difference 
from  others,  as  the  tempjp  was,  —  but  "  I  will  that 
prayers  be  made  everywhere."  Lord  King  ^  says  of 
the  primitive  churches,  that  they  did  not  imagine 
'any  such  sanctity  or  holiness  to  be  in  their  places 
of  worship  as  to  recommend,  or  make  more  accept- 
able, the  services  that  were  discharged  therein,  than 
if  they  had  been  performed  elsewhere.  He  quotes 
Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Justin  Martyr,  and  Piony- 
sius  (Bishop  of  Alexandria),  to  sustain  him  :  "  So 
that  the  primitive  practice  and  opinion,  with  re- 
spect to  this  circumstance  of  place,  was  that,  if  the 
state  of  their  affairs  would  permit  them,  they  had 
fixed  places  for  public  worship,  which  they  set 
apart  to  that  use  for  conveniency  and  decency's 
sake,  but  not  attributing  to  them  any  such  holiness 
as  thereby  to  sanctify  those  services  that  were  per- 
formed in  them."  Cotton  Mather,"*  speaking  of 
private  devotions  on  coming  into  a  place  of  public 
worship,  says :  "  And  so  far  as  holiness  of  places  is 
the  ground  therein  gone  upon,  the  principle  is  dis- 
carded." Dr.  Emmons*  says:  "How  many  have 
argued  in  favor  of  dedicating  new  meeting-houses, 
because  the  temple  was  dedicated!"  He  shows 
that  the  Christian  dispensation  superseded  the 
Mosaic,  and  so  that  the  conclusion  does  not  follow. 
Rev.  C.  Upham,  in  his  address  at  the  laying  of  the 
corner-stone  of  the  new  meeting-house  in  Salem,^ 
speaks  of  their  disappointment  at  not  finding  some 

13 


146  DELEGATION    OF   RIGHTS. 

plate  or  memento  under  the  old  one.  He  might, 
with  equal  probability  of  success,  have  looked  there 
for  a  papal  crucifix  or  the  identical  one  which 
Endicot  cut  out  of  the  king's  colors.  Dr.  Ware, 
in  his  History  of  the  Qjri  North  and  New  Brick 
Churches,"^  speaks  of  the  dedication  of  a  meeting- 
house as  early  as  1721.  —  See  Consecrations. 

*  In  Punchard's  Hist.  108.  ^  Ch.  Gov.  13.  =*  Enquiry,  part  ii. 
118,  119.  -*  Rat.  Dis.  63.  ^  *  Vol.  v.  439.  «  In  Appendix  to  Ded. 
Serm.  59.     '  Page  26. 

DEJjEGATES,  are  pastors,  ex  officio,  in  councils  ? 
Cotton  Mather^  shows  ^  that  it  has  been  strongly 
pleaded  that  no  church  officers  sit  as  delegates  as 
such,  but  only  by  being  sent  by  their  churches ; 
yet  that  practically  the  churches  act  as  though 
their  pastors  were  ex  officio  members,  though  they 
do  not  admit  pastors  without  delegates  ;  and  once 
a  synod  sent  immediately  to  a  church  for  delegates 
who  had  only  sent  their  pastors. —  See  Councils, 
of  whom  comvosed;  pastors  sit  in,  by  virtue  of  their 


delegation. 


1  Rat.  Dis.  175. 


DELEGATION  OF  RIGHTS  condemned.—Owen, 
in  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  v.^  shows 
that  no  part  of  essential  church  power  can  be  dele- 
gated ;  as  admitting  members,  choosing  officers, 
and  the  like.  See  Han.  i.  273.  —  See  Power, 
churchy  cannot  be  given  away^  nor  taken  from  themy 
nor  delegated, 

•  In  Works,  xx.  440. 


DEMOCRACY.  147 

DELEGATION,  power  of  churches  to  send^  and 
call  to  account. —  Samuel  Mather^  argues  this  point 
at  length,  maintaining  it  from  the  delegation  from 
Antioch  to  Jerusalem.  He  shows  that  the  same 
right  was  afterwards  exercised  in  sending  Clement's 
epistle  from  Rome  to  the  Corinthians ;  also  that  it 
is  fit  in  itself,  and  that  there  is  a  parallel  to  such 
calling  to  account,  in  the  case  of  Peter,  by  the 
church  at  Jerusalem,  after  his  eating  with  Cornelius, 
which  Peter  satisfactorily  explained  to  them. 

» Apology,  73—75. 

DEMOCRACY  in  church  government  —  John 
Wise,  in  his  Vindication,^  takes  a  great  stride 
(seventy  years)  in  advance  of  the  times,  and  boldly 
advocates  the  legitimacy  of  democracy  and  repub- 
lics, both  in  civil  and  ecclesiastical  government. 
He  shows  that  it  is  agreeable  to  the  law  of  nature, 
and  that  nothing  but  ill-nature  is  ever  necessary  to 
transform  a  monarch  into  a  tyrant.  He  shows, 
both  by  theory  and  examples,  how  it  may  be  made 
both  a  just  and  efficient  government,  and  how  the 
cause  of  true  piety  has  always  flourished  most 
where  this  divinely  constituted  ecclesiastical  govern- 
ment has  been  maintained,  besides  instancing  many 
cases  where  God  has  blessed  it  in  a  civil  govern- 
ment. Previous  to  this  time,  Congregationalists 
had  met  with  some  terrible  posers  from  their  anta- , 
gonists,  who  pleaded  that  their  principles  tended  to 
foster  republicanism  and  democracy.  Prynne,  for 
instance,  pressed  this  point  in  his  Twelve  Consi- 
derable   Questions ;   while  the  Congregationalists 


148  DISCIPLINE. 

wearied  themselves  to  find  the  door  of  truth,  —  not 
having  abandoned  the  notion  of  the  divine  right  of 
kings.  They  therefore  urged  special  powers  in  the 
ministry  and  elders  to  make  a  mixed  government. 
(See  Pastor,  has  he  a  negative  vote  ?)  This  is  one 
of  the  few  points  in  which  the  modern  Congre- 
gationalists  seem  to  have  made  advances  in  favor 
of  liberty,  and  to  see  the  light  clearer  than  did  their 
fathers.  —  See  Independency  endangers  monarchy. 

»  Pages  40—42,  60—66. 

DEVOTION,  private^  in  public  assemblies.  —  Cot- 
ton Mather  says  :  *  "It  is  in  these  churches  neither 
preached  nor  approved.  So  far  as  it  openly  pro- 
claims a  secret  and  singular  devotion,  it  is  con- 
demned as  a  Pharisaical  ostentation  ;  so  far  as  the 
holiness  of  places  is  the  ground  gone  upon,  the  prin- 
ciple is  discarded." 

1  Rat.  Dis.  63. 

DISCIPLINE,  for  what  required  ?  —  Owen,  in 
his  Catechism,^  enumerates  the  causes  of  disci- 
pline to  be  —  moral  evils,  false  fundamental  doc- 
trines, and  blasphemy.  He'*  raises  the  question 
whether  the  church  should  discipline  a  flagrant 
offender,  who  at  once  declares  his  penitence  openly, 
before  the  church  commence  their  process  with 
,him  ;  and  answers  in  the  negative,  unless  they  may 
reject  whom  Christ  receives ;  for  the  end  of  disci- 
pline is  attained  in  the  recovery  of  the  sinner.  Cot- 
ton Mather  ^  says  :  "  The  churches  of  New  England 
have  no  agreed  catalogue  of  crimes,  that  shall  ex- 


DISCIPLINE.  149 

pose  to  church  censure,  except  what  is  in  the  Bible 
itself.  ...  It  belongs  to  such  plain  trespasses  as  a 
person  with  our  measure  of  illumination  cannot 
obstinately  persist  in,  without  forfeiting  an  interest 
in  the  kingdom  of  God."  Mitchell  *  says :  "  No 
matter  can  be  a  subject  for  discipline  at  all  (though 
it  may  oe  for  private  reproof),  for  which  the  of- 
fender could  not  be  scripturally  excommunicated, 
in  case  of  his  persisting  in  it.  A  question  closely 
connected  with  this  is,  "  Should  a  member  be  disci- 
plined and  excluded  who  has  already  withdrawn 
from  the  church?"  For  an  answer,  see  With- 
drawing. 

^^        ^  In  Works,  xix.  560.      ^  lb.  xx.  558—560.      »  Rat.  Dis.  142. 
*  Guide,  115. 

DISCIPLINE,  proper,  a  privilege.  —  It  is  often,  if 
not  generally,  treated  as  a  warfare  among  brethren ; 
but,  rightly  conducted,  it  is  a  divinely  instituted 
privilege  of  every  erring  Christian  to  be  reclaimed 
from  his  faults.  See  this  matter  wisely  handled  in 
Samuel  Mather's  Apology,  94 — 96.  Dr.  Ames  * 
says  it  is  not  the  proper  end  of  reproof,  that  there 
maybe  an  entrance  made  to  excommunication,  but 
that  the  necessity  of  excommunication,  if  it  can  be, 
might  be  prevented. 

^  Marrow  of  Sacred  Divinity,  168.  « 

DISCIPLINE,  mode  of  procedure  in.  —  The  rule 

for  all  private  offences,  it  is  unanimously  conceded 

by  Congregationalists,  is  that  laid  down  in  Matt. 

xviii.      See    Samuel    Mather's   Apology,   74;    Dr. 

13* 


160  DISCIPLINE. 

Dwight,  Works,  Serm.  clxii. ;  Cotton's  Way  of  the 
Churches,  92,  and  Keys  of  Heaven,  85 ;  Cambridge 
Platform,  chap.  xiv. ;  Mitchell's  Guide,  84 — 96 ; 
and  John  Robinson,  in  Punchard's  History,  339. 
The  True  Description  of  the  Visible  Church  says:^ 
"  If  the  fault  be  private,  holy  and  loving  admonition 
and  reproof  are  to  be  used,  with  an  inward  desire 
and  earnest  care  to  win  their  brother ;  but  if  he 
will  not  hear,  yet  to  take  two  or  three  brethren  with 
him,  whom  he  knoweth  most  meet  for  that  purpose, 
that  by  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  every 
word  may  be  confirmed ;  and  if  he  refuse  to  hear 
them,  then  to  declare  the  matter  to  the  church." 
In  the  same  points  agree  all  the  writers  above 
cited.  Cotton  Mather-  says:  "A  scandalous  trans- 
gression, known  to  one  or  two,"  should  be  proceeded 
with  as  is  a  private  offence.  Letchford,  in  his 
Plain  Dealing,^  says :  "  Ordinarily,  matter  of  offence 
is  to  be  brought  before  the  elders  in  private."  But, 
where  the  offence  is  public,  most  Congregational 
writers  argue  that  there  is  no  need  of  these  private 
steps.  Letchford  also  adds  :  *  "  Public  offences 
are  heard  before  the  whole  church,  and  strangers 
too,  in  Boston."  For  this  course  argue  John  Ro- 
binson,* Thomas  Goodwin,^  John  Cotton,^  Cam- 
bridge Platform,'  Mitchell,'  and  Samuel  Mather.^" 
These,  and  the  other  advocates  for  a  more  summary 
process,  in  cases  of  public  notoriety,  claim  to  deduce 
their  conclusions  from  such  passages  as  1  Tim.  v. 
20,  and  1  Cor.  v.  Many  are,  however,  unable  to 
perceive  how  these,  or  any  other  directions,  con- 
cerning the  treatment  of  transgressors,  limit  the 


DISCIPLINE.  151 

^  application  of  the  rule  laid  down  in  Matt,  xviii.  If, 
for  instance,  an  offended  brother  proceeded  against 
the  incestuous  Corinthian  just  as  though  his  had 
been  a  private  offence,  why  was  not  Paul's  injunc- 
tion fulfilled  to  the  letter,  just  as  much  as  it  was, 
provided  the  whole  church  proceeded  in  a  more 
summary  way  ?  But,  as  a  faithful  lexicographer,  I 
am  constrained  to  admit  that  most  Congregational 
writers  argue  the  contrary.  The  universal  applica- 
tion of  the  rule  in  Matt,  xviii.  would  prevent  ten 
thousand  disputes,  whether  offences  come  under 
the  head  of  public  or  private.  Dr.  Dwight,"  though 
he  denies  the  necessity,  yet  advocates  the  expedi- 
ency, of  universal  private  dealing  in  public  offences, 
"  because  the  persuasion  that  it  is  necessary  is  so 
universal,  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  satisfaction  of 
all."  Dr.  Hopkins  ^^  argues  very  conclusively,  from 
the  nature  and  ends  of  discipline,  that  it  should  al- 
ways be  according  to  Matt,  xviii.,  even  for  public 
offences.  He  shows  that,  when  the  offence  is  known 
only  to  one  person,  he  cannot  proceed  in  discipline, 
for  want  of  witnesses.  Mitchell  ^^  says, —  Charges 
against  an  offending  brother  should  be  distinctly 
specified,  and  seasonably  communicated  to  him, 
commonly  in  writing.  They  should  be  sustained 
by  evidence.  The  two  or  three  witnesses  are  to  be 
called  to  judge  of  the  crime,  fault,  or  offence,  and 
not  to  proceed,  unless  the  offence  is  against  some 
express  rule  of  the  gospel,  nor  unless  there  be  evi- 
dence of  the  fact.  In  default  of  these,  they  should 
endeavor  to  convince  the  brother  offended.  If  it  be 
told  to  the  church,  and  the  delinquent  refuse  to 


152  DISCIPLINE. 

hear,  then  it  is  agreed  that  he  should  be  cut  off  from 
the  church.  (See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  139—143.) 
Punchard,  in  his  View/*  says  :  "  The  regular  course 
of  procedure  ...  is  substantially  this :  A  brother, 
who  is  acquainted  with  the  circumstances  of  the 
case,  immediately,  and  without  conference  with 
any  one,  seeks  a  private  interview  with  the  tres- 
passer; he  tells  him  plainly,  but  with  gentleness 
and  kindness,  w^hat  he  has  seen  or  known  offensive 
or  unchristian  in  his  conduct.  ...  If  the  offence  be 
strictly  private,  ...  a  private  acknowledgment .  .  . 
and  promise  of  reformation  would  be  deemed  satis- 
factory. ...  If  knowm  only  to  few,  confession  to 
these  might  be  deemed  sufficient.  But  if  the  cause 
of  complaint  be  extensively  known,  the  confession 
must  be  public.  .  .  .  Confession  and  satisfaction 
should  be  as  public  as  the  offence.  So  said  John 
Robinson,  so  say  we.  If  the  offender  refuses  to 
give  satisfaction,  the  complainant  selects  one  or 
two  .  .  .  brethren  to  assist  him  in  his  efforts  to  con- 
vince and  reclaim  the  erring  brother.  If  these  efforts 
prove  unavailing,  a  regular  complaint  is  laid  before 
the  church,  generally  ...  in  writing,  specifying  the 
particular  charges,  .  .  .  and  the  persons  by  whom, 
and  the  means  by  which,  it  can  be  proved,  and  the 
attempts  that  have  been  made  to  adjust  the  diffi- 
culty privately.  It  is  .  .  .  out  of  order  for  a  church 
to  receive  a  complaint  till  assured  that  the  private 
steps  have  been  taken.  The  church  then  vote  to 
examine  the  charges.  Evidence  of  the  truth  of 
these  is  then  called  for.  Witnesses  may  be  intro- 
duced who  are  not  professors  of  religion.     If  the 


DISCIPLINE.  153 

church  are  convinced  of  the  guilt  of  the  accused, 
they  .  .  .  labor  to  convince  him  of  his  sin,  and  to 
induce  him  to  make  Christian  satisfaction.  If  un- 
successful, the  church,  after  suitable  delay,  proceed 
to  admonish  him,  suspend  him  from  their  com- 
munion (see  Suspension),  or  to  excommunicate  and 
cut  him  off  from  all  relation  to  or  connection  with 
the  church ;  ...  to  cast  him  out  as  a  heathen  man 
and  a  publican.  The  decision  of  the  church  should 
be  announced  to  the  offender  by  the  pastor,  and 
thus  solemnly  pronouncing  his  excision  from  the 
visible  body  of  Christ,  ...  or  by  a  letter  of  the  same 
general  import,  written  in  the  name  of  the  church." 
In  a  note  ^^  he  says :  "  Many  churches  make  an 
exception  "  to  the  rule  of  private  labors  in  case  of 
public  offences ;  but  he  prefers  the  private  course, 
"  for  one  prominent  reason,  if  for  no  more,  viz.,  that 
it  is  better  adapted  to  secure  one  great  end  of  all 
church  discipline,  —  the  reformation  of  the  offender ^ 
See  Rights  of  accused. 

» In  Punchard's  Hist.  370,  371.  '^  Rat.  Dis.  148.  ^  in  Hist. 
Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  iii.  72.  ■*  lb.  *  In  Punchard's  Hist.  339  ; 
Han.  i.  263;  and  Works,  iii.  134,  135.  «  Chmch  Gov.  130,  131. 
'Keys,  85.  »  Chap.  xiv.  »  Gxiide,  105,  108,  109.  >°  Apology, 
97.  ^'  Works,  Serm.  clxu.  ^^  Vol.  ii.  355,  358.  "  Guide,  102, 
103.     >4  Pases  178—180.     »^  lb.  180. 

DISCIPLINE,  every  member  is  bound  to  proceed 
in.  —  The  obligation  to  this  is  clearly  stated  in  Cot- 
ton's Keys,  35. 

DISCIPLINE,  churches  should  assist  in^  with  ad- 
vice and  council. — Thomas  Goodwin^  demonstrates 


154  DISCIPLINE. 

this  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  the  example 

of  the  church  at  Jerusalem  in  the  dispute  at  An- 

tioch. 

1  Catechism,  21. 

DISCIPLINE  of  07ie  church  by  another.  —  NeaP 
shows  that  even  the  Brownists  held  that  one  church 
might  thus  advise,  counsel,  and,  if  need  be,  with- 
draw fellowship  from  another.  The  Independents, 
in  their  Apologetical  Narrative,^  say :  "  The  offend- 
ing church  is  to  submit  to  an  open  examination  by 
the  neighbor  churches ;  and  on  their  persisting  in 
their  error  or  miscarriage,  then  they  are  to  renounce 
all  Christian  communion  with  them."  John  White ' 
and  Cambridge  Platform  ^  lay  down  the  same  rule 
under  the  title  of  the  Third  Way  of  Communion 
of  Churches.  So  does  Thomas  Goodwin.^  —  See 
Churches  discipline  each  other ^  Sfc. 

^  Puritans,  i.  loO.  ^  lb.  492.  ^  Lamentations,  in  "Wise's  Vin- 
dication, 170,  171.     *  Chap.  XV.  sect.  2.     ^  Catechism,  21. 

DISCIPLINE,  Congregational^  efficient.  —  That 
it  is  the  reverse  has  been  the  stereotyped  complaint 
of  those  who  are  unacquainted  with  it,  and  of  some 
who  are.  N.  Whitaker^  complains  of  the  almost 
total  destitution  of  discipline  here,  and  says :  "  The 
purity  of  the  New  England  churches  is  boasted  of, 
but  not  to  be  found."  He  ascribes  the  cause  to  the 
democratic  element  contained  in  their  constitution. 
He  discards  Clement's  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians; 
mistaking  it  for  the  work  of  Clemens  Alexandrinus 
in  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  instead  of  Cle- 


DISMISSION.  155 

mens  Romanus  who  died  A.D.  100.  Some  of  his 
conclusions  appear  about  as  correct  as  is  this  prem- 
ise. Many  communions  have  been  more  strict  in 
disciplining  for  departures  from  their  sectarian 
Shibboleth ;  but,  with  all  our  culpable  remissness, 
we  challenge  the  production  of  more  strict  and 
efficient  discipline  with  respect  to  moral  character 
and  Christian  deportment.  The  appellation  "  Puri- 
tan "  was  applied  to  our  fathers  by  way  of  reproach, 
and  was  retained  by  those  who  were  the  chief  ad- 
vocates of  Congregational  doctrines. 

»  Confutation  of  Wise,  38,  87. 

DISCIPLINE,  hoio  affected  by  decisions  of  civil 
courts. —  Cotton  Mather^  argues  that  church  disci- 
pline should  not  be-brought  into  dependence  on  the 
decisions  of  civil  magistrates,  as  that  may  be  evi- 
dence to  a  church  (?)  which  is  not  admissible  in  a 
civil  court,  and  vice  versa.  Also,  that,  when  the 
session  of  a  court  is  near,  the  church  may  forbear 
to  try  a  cause,  "lest  they  prejudice  that  court,  of 
which  they  should  be  very  careful  at  all  times." 

*  Magnalia,  ii.  230. 

DISMISSION,  are  churches  bound  to  give,  to  all 
not  under  discipline  ivho  ask  it  ?  —  The  Answer  of 
the  New  England  Elders  to  this  question,*  speaking 
of  one  who  wishes  to  remove,  contrary  to  the  minds 
of  the  church,  says:  The  churches  dissuade  from 
the  evil,  and  show  the  sin,  and  do  not  consent  if  it 
seem  wrong,  but-  suspend  their  vote  against  him, 
not  willing  to  make  our  churches  places   of  im- 


156  DISMISSION. 

prisonment.  Welde,  in  his  reply  to  Rathband, 
says : ^  "If  any  man  be  desirous  and  steadfastly 
bent  to  depart,  the  church  never  holds  him  against 
his  will,  though  she  sees  little  or  no  weight  in  his 
reasons.  What  would  he  have  them  do,  when  they 
cannot  be  satisfied  with  the  grounds  of  his  depar- 
ture ?  Must  they  say  they  are  satisfied,  when  they 
are  not  ?  All  they  can  do  is,  through  indulgence, 
to  suspend  their  vote,  and  leave  him  at  liberty." 
He  goes  on  to  show  that  the  church  can  testify  to 
all  his  good  conversation ;  and  on  this  testimony 
he  can  be  received,  and  so  need  not  be  left  like  a 
heathen.  True,  these  remarks  were  made  with  spe- 
cial reference  to  changing  of  residence,  in  the  feeble 
days  of  the  colonies,  and  specially  of  the  frontier 
towns ;  but  the  principle  will  apply  to  all  removals 
from  one  church  to  another.  Were  it  understood 
and  acted  upon,  it  would  save  nearly  half  the  pre- 
sent bickerings  between  churches  and  their  dis- 
affected members,  and  half  the  "  delivering  up  to 
councils."  Here  is  a  system  of  perfect  liberty  on 
both  sides.  Cotton  Mather  ^  says :  "  When  one 
judges  that  he  can,  with  more  edification,  enjoy  the 
blessings  of  the  new  covenant  in  another  society, 
except  the  society  have  any  just  exception  against 
his  judging  so,  he  does  well  to  ask  a  dismission,  .  .  . 
and  they  ought  to  give  it.  If  they  refuse,  a  council 
may  order  it."  Isaac  Chauncy  *  says :  "  A  letter  of 
dismission  may  be  either  with  or  without  recom- 
mendation, as  the  case  may  require,  or  the  carriage 
of  the  member  hath  been,  tliough  he  hath  not  been 
under  dealing  of  the  church  for  any  censurable  ac- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  POWER.  157 

tion." — See  Affinity;  Members,  improperly  de- 
tained,  —  remove  with  consent,  —  received  withcmt 
dismission;  Separation;  Schism. 

^  Page  74.      ^  In  Han.  ii.  324,   325.      ^  Rat.  Dis.  138,  139 
Divine  Institution  of  Cong.  Churches,  119. 

DISMISSION  should  he  denied  to  one  under  deal- 
ing, or  ivhen  asked  either  to  the  loorld  or  to  a  false 
church.  —  So  argues  Isaac  Chauncy.^  The  church 
in  Boston  thus  refused  to  dismiss  F.  Hutchinson  to 
no  church.*  —  See  'Affinity  ;  Members,  may  they 
he  received  from  other  churches  without  dismission 
and  recommendation  ? 

^  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  120.  *  J.  Cotton's  Letter  to 
F.  Hutchinson,  in  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  ii.  vol.  x.  185,  186. 

DOCTRINES  of  Congregationalism. — Punch ard* 
enumerates  the  most  important  of  these  to  be,  "  The 
Scriptures  recognize  but  two  orders  of  church  offi- 
cers. .  .  .  There  should  be  an  entire  ecclesiastical 
equality  among  all  Christian  elders.  . . .  Councils  . . . 
have  no  juridical  authority,  being  simply  advisory 
bodies.  .  .  .  Churches,  though  independent  of  each 
other, .  .  .  yet  should  hold  themselves  ready  to  give 
account  to  sister-churches  of  their  faith  and  reli- 
gious practices."  He  shows  ^  that  these  were  among 
the  doctrines  of  the  JSrians,  and  of  the  Reformers 
in  the  reign  of  Edward  VI. 

*  Hist.  14.    ^  lb.  75,  210,  211. 

ECCLESIASTICAL  POWER,  2^/m^.  —  T.  Good- 
win defines  this  to  be  "  an  investiture    with  t!ic 
14 


158    '  ELDERb. 

authority  of  Christ,  merely  out  of  his  will,  whereby 
men  are  authorized  and  enabled,  by  commission 
from  Christ  and  in  his  name,  to  do  what  others 
cannot  do ;  and,  by  virtue  of  which,  that  which  they 
do  hath  a  special  efficacy  in  it,  from  the  power  of 
Christ  seconding  and  accompanying  it,  which  also 
the  conscience  acknowledging,  submits  itself  to,  as 
unto  the  power  of  Christ,  for  the  sake  of  his  will  or 
institution."  By  this  he  evidently  means  things  of 
divine  institution,  in  distinction  from  what  synods, 
councils,  churches,  or  church  officers,  decree  of  their 
own  wills,  without  an  express  institution  of  Christ. 
It  is  evident,  too,  that  Goodwin  held  a  special 
power  given  to  the  church  to  deliver  to  Satan.— 
See  Excommunication. 

*  Church  Gov.  17. 

ELDERS,  ruling:  —  This  was  formerly  one  of 
the  most  vexing  subjects  in  the  Congregational 
churches.  In  the  beginning  of  the  separation,  they 
were  in  somewhat  general  use,  but  are  now  almost 
universally  discarded.  Ainsworth,  in  his  Answei 
to  Smith,^  maintains  that  they  were  of  divers  sorts. 
from  the  use  of  different  words  to  designate  them 
in  1  Tim.  v.  17 ;  Phil.  i.  1 ;  and  Acts  xx.  Smith 
had  advocated  their  diversity  in  his  Book  of  Prin 
ciples,  but  now  retracted,  and  considered  them  all 
one  and  the  same.  Simpson,  in  his  Anatomist 
Anatomized,^  declares  that  he  believes  in  their  di- 
versity, but  asserts  that  even  some  Presbyterians 
believed  in  their  identity  with  pastors.  John  White  '^ 
argues  the  divine  right  of  ruling  elders  from  Rom. 


ELDERS.  159 

xii.  8 ;  1  Tim.  v.  17 ;  and  1  Cor.  xii.  28  :  maintaining 
that  "governments  "  here  means  church  governors 
distinct  from  teachers.  Cotton  Mather  "*  advocated 
ruling  elders,  but  tells  us  that  they  were  almost 
extinct  in  his  day;  and  that  it  was  argued  that 
1  Tim.  V.  18  was  the  only  Scripture  that  asserted 
that  office,  and  that  those  there  referred  to  might 
be  only  differently  employed  ministers.  He  quotes 
a  Scotch  writer  to  prove  their  necessity,  who  still 
concedes  that  he  can  find  no  express  mention  of 
them  for  the  first  three  centuries,  but  argues  their 
use  from  analogy  as  necessary  to  guard  the  rights 
of  the  people.  Mather  also  says :  ^  "  There  are 
some  who  cannot  see  any  such  officer  as  ruling 
elder  appointed  in  the  word  of  God.  Our  churches 
are  now  (1697)  generally  destitute  of  such  helps." 
But,®  in  the  Heads  of  Agreement,  it  is  agreed  that 
the  question  of  ruling  elders  shall  make  no  break 
among  them.  Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel 
Church,  chap,  vii.'^  says  :  "  Some  begin  to  maintain 
that  there  is  no  need  of  but  one  *pastor,  bishop,  or 
elder"  (see  ib.  chap.  viii.).  Baillie  ^  says:  "The 
Independents  (i.  e.  in  the  Westminster  Assembly) 
were  flat  against  the  institution  of  any  such  office 
by  divine  right,  though  they  were  willing  to  admit 
them  in  a  prudential  way."  See  Punchard's  View, 
78 — 84.     See  next  article. 

*  In  Han.  i.  183.  "  Ib.  ii.  245.  ^  Lamentations  in  Wise,  168. 
4Rat.  Dis.  122—128.  ^  Magnalia,  ii.  206.  ^  Ib.  236.  MVorks, 
XX.  481.     « In  Ilan.  ii.  218. 

ELDERS,  same  as  bishops.  —  One  of  the  charges 


160  ELDERS. 

against  Barrow  and  Greenwood  before  the  High 
Commission  was,  that  they  maintained  that  every 
elder,  though  no  doctor  or  pastor,  is  a  bishop.^ 
Lord  King  ^  maintains,  and  shows  conclusively  from 
the  fathers,  that  the  same  identity  was  recognized 
in  the  primitive  churches.  T.  Goodwin,  notwith- 
standing he  was  for  a  distinctive  order  of  ruling 
elders,  shows  conclusively  '"^  that  there  are  but  two 
orders  of  church  officers,  bishops  and  deacons  ;  that 
elders  and  bishops  are  the  same,  the  bishops  being 
those  whom  God  had  made  overseers  of  the  flock 
(See  Baillie  in  the  preceding  article.)  Isaac  Chaun- 
cy  *  maintains  that  Christ  appointed  elders  to  care 
for  the  internal  concerns  of  the  church,  and  deacons 
for  the  external.  "  Elder,  bishop,  and  presbyter  we 
may  find  taken  in  the  Scripture^for  one  and  the 
same  thing:  they  are  taken  indifferently  for  any 
ruling  or  teaching  minister."  Elder  means  an  old 
man :  applied  to  an  officer,  an  alderman  is  elder- 
man.  He  shows  that  the  pastoral  office  compre- 
hends the  whole  ministry ;  but,  if  the  pastor  is  un- 
able to  do  the  whole  work,  he  may  have  "  helps,  a 
teacher  to  aid  in  preaching,  and  ruling  elder  to  assist 
in  governing." 

*  Punchard's  Hist.  253.  ^  Enquiry,  part  i.  65.  ^  Catechism, 
14,  20.    •*  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  59—62. 

ELDERS,  ruling'^  ivheti  out  of  date.  —  President 
Stiles  ^  informs  us  that  several  churches,  in  com- 
pliance with  the  sentiments  of  their  pastors,  had 
ruling  elders  and  teaching  elders,  yet  they  at  length 
ceased  to  use  the  ruling  elder;  and  the  teaching 


ELDERS.  161 

elder,  as  distinct  from  pastor,  is  now  dropped.  Mr. 
Felt*  says:  "  The  office  of  elders  continued  to  be 
esteemed  in  the  churches  till  the  middle  of  the  last 
century."  Dr.  Bentley '  says :  "  The  office  of  elder 
never  existed  in  Salem  but  in  name,  and  did  not 
survive  the  first  generation ;  they  were  chosen,  but 
never  possessed  the  shadow  of  power."  Dr.  "Ware  ^ 
*  says  ruling  elders  were  obsolete  in  1735 ;  and, 
though  the  church  then  chose  two,  they  could  in- 
duce but  one  only  to  accept,  which  ended  the  mat 
ter.  Dr.  Stiles  *  says :  "  Neither  lay  nor  teaching 
elders  ever  obtained  in  many  of  the  churches  of  the 
first  (New  England)  generation."  Neal  ®  affirms 
that  they  were  obsolete  in  his  day.  —  See  two  next 
preceding  articles;  also,  Neander,  Church  Hist.  i. 
101. 

*  Convention  Sermon,  64.  ^  Annals  of  Salem,  29.  '  Descrip- 
tion of  Salem,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  vi.  243.  *  Hist. 
Old  North  and  New  Brick  Churches,  29.  *  Con.  Serm.  67.  ^  Hist. 
New  England,  i.  273—275. 

ELDERS,   ivas  there   a  plurality  of^  in  ancient 

churches  ?  —  Goodwin  ^  argues  the  affirmative,  from 

their  being  mentioned  in  the  plural,  especially  in 

Acts  xiv.  and  Titus  i.      Hopkins^  maintains  the 

negative,  from  there  being  but  one  angel  of  each 

church  addressed  in  the  Revelation.     Perhaps  both 

were  right. —  See  close  of  last  preceding  article  but 

one. 

*  Ch.  Gov.  book  vi.  chap.  6.    *  System,  ii.  232. 

ELDERS,  their  office, -—T,  Goodwin'  says:  « It 
is  the  elder's  office  to  see  that  no  drone  or  unpro- 

14* 


162  ELDERS. 

fitable  servant  be  in  the  church,  which  may  live  on 
other  men's  labors,  2  Thess.  iii.  10, 11."  Cambridge 
Platform  maintains  the  same.^  It  makes  it  the  duty 
of  ruling  elders  to  open  and  shut  the  doors  of  God's 
house  (officially)  by  admission,  ordination,  excom- 
munication, and  restoring;  to  call  the  church  to- 
gether; to  prepare  matters  in  private  for  public 
church  meetings;  to  moderate  church  meetings;  to 
be  leaders  and  guides  in  church  actions ;  to  see  that 
none  of  the  church  live  without  a  calling,  or  idly  in 
their  calling;  to  prevent  and  heal  offences  in  life 
or. doctrine;  to  feed  the  flock,  visit  the  sick,  and 
pray  with  them  when  sent  for  and  at  other  times. 
Mnce '  mentions  among  the  principles  of  the  Ro- 
binson church,  "  Ruling  elders  should  teach  but 
occasionally,  through  necessity,  or  in  their  pastor's 
absence  or  illness."  —  See  Hooker's  Survey,  part  ii. 
9—19  ;  Hutchinson's  Hist.  Mass.  376. 

1  Catechism,  20.     ^  Chap.  vii.  sect.  2.     ^  Chronology,  92. 

ELDERS,  rule  of^  what  ?  —  Cotton,  in  his  Keys,* 
makes  it  consist  in  authority  so  binding  that 
nothing  can  be  done  without  them,  and  nothing  es- 
teemed validly  done  unless  they  are  present.  Cam- 
bridge Platform  ^  holds  the  same  doctrine  of  a  mixed 
administration,  so  that  no  church  act  can  be  con- 
summated or  perfected  without  the  consent  of  both 
elders  and  people.  By  giving  the  people  power  to 
depose  their  elders,  they,  however,  virtually  limited 
their  power  to  that  of  mere  moderators,  subject  to 
appeal  to  the  church.  Robinson,  in  his  Apology,^ 
says :  "  It  behoves  the  elders  to  govern  the  people 


ELDERS.  163 

in  voting,  in  just  liberty  given  by  Christ  whatsoever. 
Let  the  elders  publicly  propound  and  order  things 
in  the  church,  and  so  give  their  sentence  on  them. 
Let  them  reprove  them  that  sin,  convince  the  gain- 
sayers,  comfort  the  repentant,  and  so  administer  all 
things  according  to  the  prescript  of  God's  word," 
though  the  people  are  freely  to  vote  in  the  elections 
and  judgments  of  the  church.  In  this  way  he 
makes  the  elders  only  moderators,  though  he  is 
endeavoring  to  prove  a  mixed  government.  —  See 
Elders,  ruling-,  when  out  of  date ;  their  office ;  rule 
as  steivards ;  servants  of  the  church  ;  rule  as  modera- 
tors;  Negative  Vote. 

»  Page  14.  2  Chap.  x.  sect.  11.  'In  Punchard's  Hist.  349; 
and  Woorks,  iii.  43. 

ELDERS  rule  as  stewards.  —  This  is  maintained 
by  Richard  Mather  ^  and  Clemens  Romanus.'  John 
Robinson,  in  his  Apology,'  says,  as  we  willingly 
leave  these  things  (admitting,  reproving,  &c.)  to 
the  elders  alone,  so  we  deny,  that,  in  the  settled 
and  well-ordered  state  of  the  church,  they  can  be 
rightly  or  orderly  done,  without  the  people's  privity 
and  consent.  It  belongs  to  the  people  primarily  to 
rule  and  govern  the  church.  In  his  Justification,^ 
he  says :  "  The  people's  obedience  stands,  not  in 
making  these  elders  their  lords,  sovereigns,  and 
judges,  but  in  listening  to  their  godly  counsels  and 
following  their  wise  directions ;  ...  so  neither  stands 
the  elders'  government  in  erecting  any  tribunal  .  .  . 
over  the  people,  but  in  instructing,  comforting,  and 
improving  them  by  the  word  of  God.'*     He  shows 


164  ELDERS. 

that  the  elder  is  set  over  the  church  as  the  physi- 
cian over  the  patient,  the  lawyer  over  his  client, 
and  the  steward  over  the  family,  or  the  watchman 
over  the  city.  Goodwin  *  says  :  "  The  government 
of  the  church  is  not  lordly,  but  stewardly  and  mini- 
sterial." Welde,  in  his  Answer  to  Rathband,^ 
shows  that  elders  are  both  servants  and  governors, 
and  that  to  them  it  pertains  to  be  the  mouth  in  the 
execution  of  the  sentences  of  the  church.  Cotton  ^ 
advances  essentially  the  same  arguments,  and  uses 
some  of  the  same  words.  Cambridge  Platform 
says :  ^  "  Church  government  or  rule  is  placed  by 
Christ  in  the  officers  of  the  church,  who  are  there- 
fore called  rulers,  while  they  rule  with  God ;  yet,  in 
case  of  mal-administration,  they  are  subject  to  the 
power  of  the  church."  John  Robinson  shows  the 
same  in  his  Apology.^  —  See  Ministers,  authority 

of- 

^  Ch.  Gov.  59.  2  Epist.  to  Cor.  28,  30.  ^  In  Punchard's  Hist. 
346,  349;  and  "Works,  iii.  34.  '•lb.  329;  and  Works,  ii.  144. 
*  Catechism,  19.  «  In  Han.  ii.  318.  "^  Keys,  64.  »  Chap.  x.  sect.  7. 
9  In  Han.  i.  379. 

ELDERS,  servants  of  the  church. —  Robinson,  in 
his  Justification  of  Separation,'  says :  "  We  profess 
the  bishops  or  elders  to  be  the  only  ordinary  gover- 
nors in  the  church,  .  .  .  only  we  may  not  acknow- 
ledge them  for  lords  over  God's  heritage ;  but  we 
hold  eldership  as  other  ordinances  given  to  the 
church  for  her  service,  and  so  the  elders  or  officers 
servants  and  ministers  of  the  church."  Ainsworth, 
in  his  Answer  to  Johnson  and  Clyfton,*  says: 
"  Neither  should  the  elders  be  minded,  like  Ahitho- 


ELDERS.  165 

phel,  to  take  it  ill  if  their  counsel  be  not  followed." 
Barrowe,  in  his  reply  to  GifFard,  asserts  ^  that,  in 
default  of  elders,  the  church  have  power  not  onjy  to 
choose,  but  also  to  ordain  them ;  for  the  eldership 
doth  not  add  more  power,  but  more  help  and  ser- 
vice, to  the  church  in  this  action."  Owen,  in  his 
Catechism,  Ans.  42,*  says  :  Discipline,  by  authority, 
is  admitted  to  the  elders ;  trial,  judgment,  and  con- 
sent, to  the  brethren.  But  he  before  asserts,*  Ans. 
28,  that  the  elders  guide  the  worship  by  authority, 
not  from  the  church,  but  from  Christ.  —  See  Nean- 
der's  Church  History,  i.  109.  See  Officers,  ser- 
vants of  the  church. 

»  In  Han.  i.  205.   ^  lb.  250.   ^  lb.  58.   *  Works,  xix.  547.    *  lb.  529. 

ELDERS  rule  as  moderators.  —  So  taught  John 
Robinson,^  in  his  Apology  ^  and  in  his  Answer  to 
Helwisse.'  He  says  of  prophesying,  that  the  officers 
were  to  moderate  and  determine  the  whole  exercise. 
Ainsworth,  in  his  Answer  to  Clyfton,*  says :  "  The 
elders  are  to  teach,  direct,  and  govern  the  church  in 
the  election  of  officers.  They  are  to  do  the  like 
in  judging  and  excommunicating,  .  .  .  and  other 
public  affairs."  He  had  just  asserted  "  that  to  give 
voices,  in  the  decision  of  controversies  and  judging 
of  sinners,  is  not  a  part  of  government^  but  of  power, 
which  saints  out  of  office  have."  To  this  agrees 
Cotton.^  Cartwright,  in  his  reply  to  Whitgift,^ 
says  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  acted  as  moderators, 
while  the  churches  elected  pastors.  Hopkins  says ; '' 
"  To  rule  over  the  churches  means  only  to  take  the 
lead  or  preside  in  the  churches ; "  yet  he  seems  to 


166  ELDERS. 

hold  to  the  necessity  of  their  acting  in  concurrence 
with  the  church.  —  See  Ministers,  authority  of. 

'  In  Punchard's  Hist.  349 ;  Han.  i.  380  ;  and  Works,  iii.  43. 
« lb.  369.  3  In  Han.  i.  261,  262.  ■*  lb.  249.  *  Keys,  chap.  v. 
«  Page  44.    '  System,  ii.  238. 

ELDERS,  Iww  invested  ivith  rule.  —  Cotton  *  says: 
"  The  brethren  of  the  church  invest  him  with  rule : 
partly  by  choosing  him  to  the  office  which  God  hath 
invested  with  rule,  partly  by  professing  their  own 
subjection  to  him  in  the  Lord."  He  argues  that 
those  can  thus  invest  others  with  rule  who  have 
themselves  no  power  to  rule.  So  Owen,  in  his 
True  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  vii.^  says : 
"  Rule,  or  the  execution  of  authority,  is  in  the  hands 
of  the  elders."  —  See  Power,  church  may  give,  8fC. 

»  Keys,  73.     =*  Works,  xx.  472. 

ELDERS,  is  their  office  perpetual  ?  —  The  exiles 
in  Amsterdam,  in  their  reply  to  Junius,^  object  to 
the  Dutch  churches  that  their  elders  change  yearly, 
and  do  not  continue  in  their  office,  according  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  apostles  and  practice  of  the  primitive 
churches,  Rom.  xii.  4 ;  Acts  xx.  27,  28 ;  1  Pet.  v. 
1 — 4.  Robinson  makes  the  same  objection  in  his 
Apology.^ 

» In  Han.  i.  144.     ^  lb.  373. 

ELDERS  to  he  chosen  by  the  people.  —  Goodwin 
in  his  Church  Government,^  argues  that  because 
God  has  appointed  elders  and  deacons  to  be  set  up 
by  choice,  and  the  people  did  choose  their  deacons^ 


ELDERS.  167 

f 

therefore  we  infer  that  they  may  choose  their  elders. 
See  Pastor,  power  to  electa  in  the  church. 

*  Page  20. 

ELDERS,  does  their  power  extend  ^beyond  their 
own  church? — The  Independents  in  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly^  maintain  the  negative:  from  Scrip- 
ture, which  limits  their  power  to  a  particular  flock, 
Acts  XX.  28 ;  1  Pet.  v.  2 ;  Coloss.  i.  7 ;  and  from 
a  pastor's  office,  in  which  preaching  and  ruling  are 
joined.  They  enumerate  a  host  of  incongruities  in 
their  being  elders  to  other  flocks.  Goodwin  shows 
this,  at  great  length,  in  various  parts  of  his  Church 
Government.^  He  shows  ^  that  the  elders  were  or- 
dained city  by  city  or  church  by  church,  as  Titus  i.  5 
should  be  rendered  ;  and  *  that  nothing  can  deprive 
a  church  of  the  right  to  have  elders  of  their  own  to 
preside  over  them.  Tompson  and  Mather,  in  their 
Answer  to  Herle,*  say :  "  Ordinary  elders  are  not, 
like  the  apostles,  to  feed  all  flocks,  but  that  flock 
over  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  made  them  over- 
seers." They  show  that,  by  consequence,  elders 
cannot  ordain  elders  of  other  flocks,  unless  invited 
so  to  do. 

» In  Han.  ii.  462—472.  =  Particularly  63—191.  ^  Page  82. 
*  Page  138.     »  In  Han.  ii.  176. 

ELDERS,  is  one  or  more,  necessary  to  the  poioer 
of  the  church  to  act? — Goodwin*  maintains  that 
they  are  necessary  to  any  further  action  than  to 
supply  themselves  with  such  an  eldership.  Query, 
Do  they  not  thus  supply  themselves,  pro  tem.,  when 


168  ELDEKS. 

they  choose  a  moderator  from  among  themselves  ? 
Wise'^  says,  that  when  the  pastors  will  not  convene 
a  church,  they  may  consider  themselves  without  a 
ruler,  and  may  convene,  as  when  they  have  no 
minister  to  choose  one. —  See  Government,  churchy 
power  of^  in  the  people;  Pastor,  has  he  a  negative 
vote  ?  Ministers,  people  may  do  their  ivork  if  they 
neglect  it;  Power,  installed  in  the  ministry  or  the 
people  ? 

1  Ch.  Gov.  138.    2  Quar.  of  the  Churches,  168. 

ELDERS,  have  they  exclusive  government? — This 
was  claimed  by  Francis  Johnson,  on  the  ground 
that  otherwise  the  people  would  rule  both  the  mini- 
ster and  the  elders.^  Studley  maintained  the  same, 
when  some  of  his  people  wished  to  dismiss  him  for 
his  misconduct.  He  says :  ^  "  Here  was  a  begin- 
ning to  tread  the  path  of  popular  government,  the 
bane  of  all  good  order,  both  in  church  and  common- 
wealth." Ainsworth,  in  his  Answer  to  Clyfton,^ 
shows  that,  on  this  ground,  there  never  were  any 
true  churches  which  w^ere  constituted  before  there 
were  any  elders  to  govern  them. 

1  Han.  i.  217.    ^  lb.  245.    ^  ib.  247. 


In  taking  leave  of  this  once  important  —  now 
obsolete  —  subject  of  ruling  elders,  it  may  be  re- 
marked that  the  opponents  of  our  fathers  continu- 
ally alarmed  them  with  the  bugbear  of  democracy. 
They  had  never  dared  question  the  divine  right  of 
kings,  and  seem  to  have  been  often  appalled  by  the 


ELECTION.  169 

Sight  of  their  own  likeness.  They  little  dreamed 
that  the  truths  which  they  demonstrated  would  be 
followed  with  such  democratic  consequences  and 
results.  Being  sincere  monarchists,  they  tried  to 
make  out  a  mixed  government  in  Congregational- 
ism ;  Christ  being  the  King,  the  ruling  elders  the 
aristocracy,  and  the  churches  the  people.  But,  as 
their  principles  obliged  them  to  make  their  elders 
amenable  to  the  people,  they  in  fact  reduced  them 
to  mere  presidents  of  democratic  assemblies  under 
the  great  divine  constitution.  Thus  their  demo- 
cratic church  notions  and  the  growing  spirit  of 
democratic  civil  liberty  mutually  strengthened  each 
other,  till,  long  before  the  American  Revolution,  the 
advocates  for  tory  rule  and  aristocratical  eldership 
became  comparatively  few.  The  same  spirit  of 
democratic  liberty  is  now  making  vast  inroads  into 
the  Hierarchal  and  Presbyterial  communions ;  and 
causing  revolutions,  based  more  or  less  on  Congre- 
gational principles,  by  those  who  as  yet  only  see 
men  as  trees  wall^ing.  May  they  soon  see  every 
man  clearly!  Every  new  triumph  of  civil  and  reli- 
gious liberty  adds  to  the  growth  of  that  stone  which 
is  destined  to  become  a  great  mountain,  and  fill 
the  whole  earth.  —  See  Independency  endangers 
monarchy.  For  the  whole  subject  of  elders,  see 
Officers,  Ministers,  Pastor,  Presbytery. 

ELECTION  gives  power^  hut  does  not  transmit  it. 
Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  iv.* 
shows  that  election  to  office  only  gives  the  power 
of  that  office,  as  Christ  directs,  but  does  not  trans- 
it 


170  EVANGELISTS.  . 

mit  power  from  one  to  another.  The  power  of 
office  is  not  in  the  electors.  And,  under  the  head 
of  Ordination,  it  will  appear  that  it  is  not  in  the 
ordainer,  but  is  directly  from  Christ  to  those  whom 
the  people  elect. 

^  Works,  XX.  426. 

EVANGELISTS,  what.—  Thomas  Goodv/in '  as- 
serts that  they  were  extraordinary  ministers,  to  cease. 
And  he  attempts  to  prove  it  ^  from  1  Tim.  i.  3,  and 
Tit.  i.  5.  He  says  their  business  was  "  to  perfect  the . 
work  which  was  begun,  and  to  settle  the  churches." 
John  Cotton '  says :  "  But,  for  the  continuance  of 
this  office  of  an  evangelist  in  the  church,  there  is 
no  direction  in  the  Scriptures."  —  See  Punchard's 
View,  76,  77. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  129.     '  lb.  312.    =«  Keys,  78. 

EVANGELISTS  not  to  be  ordained  for  the  con- 
version of  infidels.  —  Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a  Gos- 
pel Church,  chap,  v.*  maintains. that  no  church  has 
power  to  ordain  men  for  the  conversion  of  infidels, 
unless  by  designation  of  divine  Providence;  that 
the  primitive  churches  ordained  none  but  to  office 
in  a  particular  church.  He  asserts  that  such  ordi- 
nations were  forbidden  in  the  ancient  churches,  and 
that  the  Council  of  Chalcedon*  declared  them  null. 
"  Such  ordination  wants  a  constituted  cause,"  viz. 
election  by  the  people.  On  this  principle  all  our 
ordinations  of  missionaries,  evangelists,  &c.  are  un- 
congregational.     When  there  is  a  church  to  need 

*  A.D.  461. 


EXCOMMUNICATION.  171 

a  pastor,  they  are  competent  to  ordain  him.  And, 
as  for  the  necessity  for  it  to  their  administering 
occasional  communion  to  destitute  churches,  it 
should  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  was  formerly 
considered  as  out  of  order.  (See  Ministers,  may 
they  administer  seals  in  another  church  ?)  But  sup- 
pose Richard  Mather's  and  Dr.  Watts's  theory  the 
ti'ue  one,  viz.  that  the  church  may  lawfully  employ 
any  of  their  own  number  to  administer  them, — 
(see  Seals,  can  a  church  authorize  ?  8fC.)  —  then 
there  is  no  need  of  any  special  unction,  by  ordina- 
tion, either  in  a  broken  or  an  unbroken  succession, 
to  give  this  power.  I.  Chauncy  ^  says  that  an  evan- 
gelist "  needs  no  other  ordination  than  the  appro- 
bation of  the  church  of  which  he  is  a  member, 
accompanied  with  solemn  prayer  for  a  blessing  on 
his  ministry."  There  was  an  ordination  of  several 
evangelists  for  the  Society  for  promoting  Christian 
Knowledge,  in  Boston,  in  1733.^  See  Neander's 
Planting  and  Training  of  the  Church,  book  iii. 
chap.  5.  The  arguments  for,  and  the  mode  of  pro- 
cedure in,  the  ordination  of  evangelists  and  mis- 
sionaries, are  given  at  length  in  Upham's  Rat.  Dis. 
sect.  86 — 94.  Suffice  it  to  recommend  the  careful 
investigation  of  this  question.  —  See  Ordination 
of  missionaries, 

*  In  Works,   xx.   456.      ^  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,   83 
^  Rev.  Dr.  Sewall's  Sermon  at  their  Ordination. 


EXCOMMUNICATION,  what  —  A  question 
much  agitated  among  the  old  Congregational  wri- 
ters and  some  others.     The  True  Description  out 


172  EXCOMMUNICATION. 

of  the  Word  of  God  of  the  Visible  Church  *  holds 
that  "  it  is  a  casting  out  of  their  congregation  and 
fellowship,  covenant,  and  protection  of  the  Lord, 
and  delivering  to  Satan,"  &c.  Goodwin^  main- 
tains the  sanie  doctrine  of  an  official  spiritual  pun- 
ishment, from  which  there  is  no  appeal  on  earth. 
He  heads  his  sixth  chapter,  book  I. :  "  That  by  ex- 
communication more  is  meant  than  a  mere  casting 
out  of  the  church  ;  that  it  is  an  ordinance  of  Christ 
to  deliver  the  excommunicate  person  to  Satan,  in 
his  name  and  power."  And  fully  does  he  sustain  his 
caption,  in  his  positions,  if  not  by  his  arguments. 
He  makes  the  execution  of  the  sentence  the  anathe- 
ma maranatha^  and  maintains  that  Satan  is  ever 
ready  to  visit  with  special  terrors  such  as  are  cast 
out.  His  arguments  are  specious  and  terse.  Lord 
King'  shows  that  it  was  thus  viewed  by  the  an- 
cients, as,  for  instance,  from  Tertullian  :  "  That  the 
delinquent  was  banished  from  communion  of 
prayers,  assemblies,  and  all  holy  converse ;  being 
looked  upon  as  unworthy  of  human  society,  cast 
out  of  the  church  of  God,  and,  impenitently  dying 
in  that  state,  as  certainly  excluded  from  the  king- 
dom of  God  hereafter."  John  Owen,  in  his  Nature 
of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  x.*  defines  it  "  a  giving 
up  to  the  state  of  the  heathen  and  the  kingdom  of 
Satan,  and  declaring  him  liable  to  everlasting  pun- 
ishment without  repentance." 

Others,  however,  advocated  a  different  theory. 
Burroughs,  in  his  L'enicum,*  says :  "  It  is  a  great 
question  among  our  brethren,  whether  this  traditio 
SatancB  were  not  apostolical,  peculiar  to  the  apos- 


EXCOMMUNICATION.  173 

ties,  so  as  ordinary  elders  had  it  not."  Bartlett,  in 
his  Model,^  asserts  that  the  same  was  a  great  ques- 
tion among  the  Presbyterians  in  the  Westminster 
Assembly.  Hetherington  ^  says :  "  The  Indepen- 
dents practically  admitted  no  church  censure  but 
admonition ;  for  that  cannot  properly  be  called  ex- 
communication, which  consisted,  not  in  expelling 
an  obstinate  offender,  but  in  withdrawing  them- 
selves from  him."  We  see,  however,  that  this  was 
not  Goodwin's  opinion,  nor  can  I  find  that  Bur- 
PDUghs  denied  the  power  of  expulsion  from  a  church. 
The  Declaration  of  Discipline,  published  anony- 
mously (of  necessity)  in  1574  (probably  Udal's), 
says :  ^  Excommunication  is  a  cutting  off  from  the 
communion  and  fellowship  of  the  faithful ;  but  de- 
clares it  to  be  "  foully  abused."  It  ^  reprobates  exe- 
cration as  a  medium  in  excommunication.  Cotton 
Mather ^°  says:  The  difference  between  the  greater 
and  the  lesser  excommunication  seems  so  little,  that 
"  the  suspension  laid  upon  an  offender,  at  the  time 
of  his  admonition,  is  often  stopped  at."  And  ^* 
"formerly  they  pretended  to  a  formal  giving  to 
Satan ;  the  pastors  of  some  churches  have  now 
espoused  another  notion  of  this  passage,  —  a  prero- 
gative apostolical  and  extraordinary."  S.  Mather'^ 
is  out  upon  the  doctrine  with  a  vengeance.  He 
says :  "  As  to  a  power  fastened  to  the  keys,  ...  by 
which  men  can  deliver  up  a  person  to  the  devil,  in 
the  name  and  authority  of  Jesus  Christ,  we  pretend 
to  no  such  power,  .  .  .  nay,  we  detest  it."  Begin- 
ning thus,  he  goes  on  to  do  justice  to  his  position, 

and  wonders  that  churches  advanced  in  the  doc» 
16* 


174  EXCOMMUNICATION. 

trines  of  the  Reformation  should  adopt  a  theory 
which  so  props  the  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of 
the  church,  and  about  which  there  are  no  charges 
and  special  directions  in  the  word  of  God.     He 
says  that  these  churches  pretend  to  no  more  power 
over  their  members  than  a  society  of  grave  philo- 
sophers over  theirs,  viz.  "  to  censure  and  exclude 
from  their  society,  when  they  have  forfeited  its  pri- 
vileges."    And  he  says  that  all  such  as  are  tho- 
roughly Congregational  will  be  content  with  this 
power.      Isaac  Chauncy  ^^  says  :  "  Excommunica* 
tion  puts  a  person  but  into  the  condition  of  publi- 
cans   and    sinners,  with    respect   to   ordinances." 
Professor  Knowles,  in  his  Memoir  of  Roger  Wil- 
liams, says:**  The  churches  of  Plymouth  were  in 
advance  of  those  in  Massachusetts,  because  they 
held  ecclesiastical  censures  to  be  wholly  spiritual. 
John  Milton,  in  his  Treatise  on  Christian  Doctrine, 
says :  ^*  Deliver  to  Satan,  i.e.  "  give  him  over  to  the 
world,  which,  as  being  out  of  the  pale  of  the  church, 
is  the  kingdom  of  Satan."    Punchard,  in  his  View,'^ 
seems  to  recognize  the  doctrine  of  sometimes  giving 
up  to   Satan,  in  the  distinction  which  he  makes 
between  excommunication  and  withdrawment  of 
fellowship ;  the  latter  affecting  the  church  standing, 
but  not  the  Christian  standing,  of  the-  disorderly 
brother :  but  he  acknowledges  his  lack  of  Congre- 
gational authorities  for  the  distinction. 

» In  Punchard's  Hist.  371 ;  and  Han.  i.  33.  *  Ch.  Gov.  3,  35, 
39,  et  al.  =*  Enquiry,  part  i.  123—125.  "*  Works,  xx.  540—544. 
6  In  Han.  iii.  111.  «  lb.  240.  ''  Note  in  Neal  s  Puritans,  i.  489. 
"  Page  168.    »  lb.  176.     >»  Rat.  Dis.  149.     »*  lb.  165.     »'  Apology, 


EXCOMMUNICATION.  176 

106—109.    "  Div.  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  122.    '*  Page  39.    "  Vol. 
ii.  208.     "  Pages  181,  281—286. 

EXCOMMUNICATION  hy  vote  of  the  cliurch.  — 
The  Answer  of  the  New  England  Elders  ^  says : 
"  The  power  of  excommunication  is  in  the  church." 
Robinson,  in  his  Answer  to  Helwisse,^  says :  One 
of  the  elders  pronounces  it,  upon  the  people's  as- 
sent; .  .  .  the  men  manifesting  their  assent  by  some 
convenient  word  or  sign,  and  the  women  by  silence. 
The  Robinson  Church,  in  their  True  Description, 
&c.°  advocate  the  same  course.  So  all  Congfreffa- 
tionalists  agree.  Their  views  may  be  found  in 
Goodwin,  Ch.  Gov.  109, 112, 146,  209  ;  Han.  i.  254; 
ii.  482,  493;  iii.  41,  246,  248;  Cotton's  Keys,  31, 
88 — 91;  Hooker's  Survey,  part  i.  62,  197;  part  iii. 
45,  46;  Watts's  Complete  Works,  iii.  200;  Con- 
fession of  Low  Country  Exiles,  in  Han.  i.  95 ;  Ains- 
worth,  in  his  Controversy  with  Johnson,  ib.  248; 
and  Allin  and  Shepard,  in  their  Defence  of  the 
Answer  to  the  Nine  Positions,  in  ib.  iii.  41. 

'  Page  72.  ^  In  Punchard's  Hist.  339 ;  and  "Works,  iii.  136. 
»Ib.  371. 

EXCOMMUNICATION  through  the  officers,  hy 
the  'power  of  the  church,^—  Ainsworth,  in  his  Answer 
to  Broughton,^  says :  "  Myself  alone  never  excom- 
municated any,  but  together  with  the  church, 
whereof  I  am,  in  the  name  and  power  of  Christ." 
The  Congregational  Union  of  England  and  Wales 
say :  ^  "  The  power  of  rejection  from  a  Christian 
church  we  believe  to  be  vested  in  the  church  itself, 
through  its  own  officers."     Owen,  in  his  Nature  of 


176  EXCOMMUNICATION. 

a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  x.^  says :  The  church  have 
power  to  put  away  an  offender  without  an  officer; 
though  judicial  power  is  properly  in  the  church,  and 
executive  in  its  officers. 

'  In  Han.  i.  152.     ^  jb.  iii.  600.    =*  Works,  xx.  547. 

EXCOMMUNICATION,  is  improper,  valid?  — 
Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,^  says  that 
"this  depends  on  the  person's  own  conscience.  .  .  . 
If  he  knows  himself  to  be  guilty,  it  is  not  void  be- 
cause wrongfully  performed.  If  he  knows  that  he 
is  innocent,  their  wrong  course  cannot  injure  him 
before  God."  And  I  am  so  sadducaical  as  to  sus- 
pect, that  his  own  conscience,  and  the  frightful 
bugbear  doctrine,  have  much  more  to  do  with  his 
terrors  than  any  satanical  influence,  which  it  is  now 
in  the  power  of  churches,  by  their  vote  and  their 
elders'  anathemas,  to  raise  against  him. 

^  Works,  XX.  567. 

EXCOMMUNICATION  should  be  only  for  great 
sins.  —  The  Independents,  in  their  Apologetical 
Narrative,^  say :  "  They  apprehend  that  excommu- 
nication should  be  only  for  crimes  of  the  last  im- 
portance." *  Robinson,  in  his  Answer  to  Bernard,' 
says :  "  The  church  of  England  is  in  a  heavy  case, 
that  plays  with  excommunications  as  children  do 
with  rattles."  Hooker '  shows  that  toleration  must 
be  granted  to  corrupt  members  till  the  evil  be  ex- 
amined, the  parties  convened,  and  censures  applied 

*  They  evidently  refer  to  what  they  termed  the  greater  ex- 
communication, or  delivering  to  Satan. 


EXCOMMUNICATION.  177 

for  reformation.  Catting  off  is  only  used  when 
things  come  to  an  extremity.  (See  Rights  of  the 
accused.)  He  maintains  ^  that  gross  sins  "  only 
deserve  excommunication  by  the  law  of  Christ." 
Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  x.* 
shows  that  excommunication  should  be  only  of 
scandalous  offenders  for  known  sin.  The  fact  must 
be  confessed  or  clearly  proved,  a  previous  process 
had,  and  the  case  determined  by  the  whole  church. 
"  Haste  is  the  bane  of  church  rule.''^ 

^  In  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  492.  ^  in  Han.  i.  209  ;  and  Works,  ii.  60. 
'■^  Part  i.  27,  28.     *  lb.  part  iii.  39,  40.     ^  In  Works,  xx.  549—551. 

EXCOMMUNICATION  in  difficult  cases;  churches 
may  have  counsel  previous  to.  —  So  says  Cotton 
Mather,  in  his  Ratio  Disciplinae.^  T.  Goodwin,  in 
his  Church  Government,^  seems  to  lay  down  prin- 
ciples which  go  against  this  conclusion,  though  he 
is  arguing  against  a  previous  consultation  of  a 
classical  Presbytery. 

»  Page  155.    «  Pages  144—150. 

EXCOMMUNICATION  should  he  made  public.  — 
There  is  such  a  relation  of  churches  that  such  an 
act  should  be  made  public.  Thus  the  church  in 
Salem  apprised  the  church  in  Dorchester  of  their 
dealings  with  Roger  Williams.^  The  reason  is 
obvious,  that  there  should  be  sufficient  publicity 
for  the  community  to  be  informed  in  what  relation 
the  individual  stands  to  the  church.  In  whatever 
way  this  is  made  public,  it  is  sufficient. 
*  Hutchinson's  Hist.  Mass.  i.  371. 


178  EXCOMMUNICATED. 

EXCOMjMUNICATION  maj/  take  place  in  the 
absence  of  the  offender. —  Thus  the  church  excluded 
Mr.  Eaton,  first  teateher  of  the  school  in  Cambridge.^ 
If  it  be  asked,  How  is  this  consistent  with  the  rule 
in  Matt,  xviii.  ?  it  is  answered,  in  the  language  of 
one  of  the  old  Puritan  writers,  "  Whatever  is  the 
dictate  of  the  law  of  nature  is  the  law  of  God." 
Otherwise,  the  delinquent  might  claim  to  be  in 
good  standing  in  the  church,  so  long  as  he  kept  out 
of  the  way. 

'  Winthrop's  Journal,  i.  313. 

EXCOMMUNICATION,  one  church  has  not  poiver 
of^  over  another.  —  Ainsworth,  in  his  Communion 
of  Saints,^  says :  "  For  although  we  may  advise, 
exhort,  warn,  reprove,  &c.  so  far  as  Christian  love 
and  power  extend,  yet  we  find  no  authority  com- 
mitted to.  one  congregation  over  another  for  excom- 
municating. .  .  .  Christ  reserveth  this  power  in  his 
own  hand."  Burton,  though  he  seems  in  words* 
to  maintain  the  contrary,  yet  evidently  refers  to  a 
mere  withdrawal  of  fellowship. —  See  Churches 
discipline  each  other ^  but  not  juridically. 

^  In  Han.  i.  285.    ^  lb.  ii.  77. 

EXCOMMUNICATED,  how  to  be  treated.  — The 
views  of  Congregationalists  differ  on  this  point, 
correspondingly  to  their  views  of  the  nature  of  ex- 
communication. Should  he  be  treated  as  the  Jews 
treated  publicans  and  sinners,  or  as  Christ  treated 
them  ?  John  Cotton  says :  ^  "  With  a  publican  the 
Jews  would  not  eat ; ...  no  more  should  we  with 


EXCOMMUNICATED.  179 

excommunicate  persons."  Cotton  Mather  says:' 
"  They  are  not  excluded  from  civil  privileges',  but 
from  familiarity ;  thus  acting  according  to  the  apos- 
tle's rule  to  avoid  them."  The  Robinson  Church, 
in  their  True  Description,  &oc.,^  say :  "  They  (the 
church)  are  to  warn  the  whole  congregation,  and 
all  other  faithful,  to  hold  him  as  a  heathen  and  a 
publican,  and  to  abstain  themselves  from  his  society, 
as  not  to  eat  or  drink  with  him,  &c. ;  unless  it  be 
such  as  of  necessity  must  needs,  as  his  wife,  his 
children,  and  family.  Yet  these,  if  they  be  mem- 
bers of  the  church,  are  not  to  join  with  him  in  any 
spiritual  exercise."  This  was  written  either  by 
Clyfton  or  Smith,  Robinson's  predecessors.  Robin- 
son says  *  that  "  excommunication  should  be  wholly 
spiritual,  a  77ie7'e  rejecting  the  scandalous  from  the 
communion  of  the  church,  in  the  holy  sacraments 
and  those  other  spiritual  privileges  which  are  pecu- 
liar to  the  faithful."  John  Cotton  *  argues  that  they 
were  to  walk  towards  them  as  the  Jews  walk  to- 
wards heathen  and  publicans,  withholding  from 
them  familiar  civil  communion ;  for  so  the  Jews 
said  to  Christ's  disciples,  "  Why  eateth  your  Master 
with  publicans  and  sinners  ?  "  A  most  unfortunate 
quotation  for  his  argument,  unless  the  example  of 
the  Pharisees  is  to  be  followed  rather  than  that 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Cambridge  Platform,^ 
Hooker's  Survey,^  and  Owen's  Catechism,  Ans.  46,^ 
teach  the  doctrine  of  non-intercourse.  But  Samuel 
Mather*  advocates  the  contrary;  the  church,  as  he 
argues,  having  gone  to  the  extent  of  their  commis- 
sion when  they  have  cast  the  offender  out  of  their 


180  EXCOMMUNICATED. 

communion.  MitchelP^  supposes  the  injunction, 
"  no'  not  to  eat,"  to  refer  to  persons  guilty  of  gross 
iniquities ;  "  with  such  a  one  not  to  company ;  " 
though  he  advocates  a  distinction  in  the  conduct 
to  be  observed  towards  excommunicates  and  other 
impenitent  persons.  Dwight "  holds  the  same  view 
of  the  interpretation  of  the  passage.  Ames,  in  his 
Marrow  of  Sacred  Divinity/^  says  :  "  They  who 
are  lawfully  excommunicated  are  to  be  avoided  of 
all  communicants,  not  in  respect  of  duties  simply 
moral,  or  otherwise  necessary,  but  in  respect  to 
those  parts  of  conversation  which  are  wont  to  ac- 
company approbation."  Letchford,  in  his  Plain 
Dealing,*^  says:  "The  excommunicated  is  held  as 
a  heathen  man  and  a  publican,  yet  children  may 
eat  with  their  parents.  The  excommunicated  may 
come,  and  hear  the  word  and  prayer.  But  at  New 
Haven,  where  Mr.  Davenport  presides,  he  is  held 
out  of  the  meeting  in  frost  and  snow,  if  he  will 
hear."  Perhaps  this  is  an  old  edition  of  blue-law 
fictions.  But  sure  it  is  that  even  some  of  our  Puri- 
tan fathers  retained  so  much  dread  of  what  the 
popes  invented,  that  they  supposed  excommunica- 
tion the  most  dreadful  of  evils,  and  helped  to  make 
it  so.  In  John  Cotton's  Letter  (in  behalf  of  his 
church)  to  Francis  Hutchinson,^'*  it  is  admitted  that 
he  should  sit  at  table  with  his  mother,  though  they 
deny  that  others  than  uear  connections  may  thus 
eat.  Who  gave  the  dispensation  for  connections 
not  to  esteem  the  excommunicate  as  a  heathen  and 
a  publican  ?  —  See  Excommunication,  lohat ;  Ex- 
communicated, may  they  set  up  churches  ? 


EXCOMMUNICATED.  181 

Way  of  the  Churches,  93.  ^  Rat.  Dis.  165,  156.  »  In  Pun- 
chard's  Hist.  371.  "lb.  363.  "^  Keys,  81.  «  Chap.  xiv.  sect.  5. 
7  Part  iii.  39.  *»  Works,  xix.  559.  »  Apology,  93—109.  »°  Guide, 
130.  "  Works,  Serm.  clxii.  ^^  page  i69.  "  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col. 
series  iii.  vol.  iii.  73.     *"*  lb.  series  ii.  vol.  x.  186. 

EXCOMMUNICATED,  his  sentence  to  be  treated 
as  rights  till  the  matter  is  examined  and  judged  by 
others.  —  Goodwin  ^  shows  that  this  is  right  in 
itself,  and  was  practised  by  the  primitive  churches. 
Mitchell  ^  clearly  advocates  the  same  doctrine,  which 
has  been  ever  practised.  By  the  advice  of  council, 
however,  those  deemed  to  have  been  unjustly  cast 
out  are  received  into  other  churches.^ — See  Dis- 
mission; Members  received  vnthout  dismission. — 
See  also  the  last  preceding  article. 

'  Ch.  Gov.  204,  227.    =  Guide,  118.     '^  Hubbard's  Hist.  Mass.  419 

EXCOMMUNICATED,  may  they  set  vp  churches  ? 
Goodwin  '  strenuously  maintains  the  negative,  on 
the  ground  of  his  hobby  doctrine,  —  their  being 
judicially  delivered  to  Satan.  Here  he  at  one  blow 
unchurches  all  the  churches  of  the  Reformation. 
They  were  again  and  again  excommunicated  under 
the  most  awful  execrations.  Besides,  he  here  loses 
sight  of  his  own  exception,  —  that  unjust  excom- 
munication is  null  and  void  in  the  sight  of  God. 
Admit  this  exception,  and  his  proposition  amounts 
to  no  more  than  the  doctrine  of  all  orthodox  Con- 
gregationalists,  viz.  that  none  but  penitent  believers 
have  a  right  to  church  membership. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  207. 
16 


182  FELLOWSHIP. 

FAITH,  particular,  i.e.  assurance  of  having'  the 
thing"  prayed  for.  —  Thomas  Goodwin  held  the  doc- 
trine of  a  particular  faith,  and  prayed  not  for  Crom- 
welPs  recovery,  of  which  he  was  assured ;  but  his 
assurance  proved  unfounded  presumption.^  John 
Howe  held  the  contrary  doctrine. 

*  Eliot's  Ecc.  Hist.  Mass.,  in  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  ix.  9. 

FELLOWSHIP,  all  Christians  have  a  right  to  it. 
Goodwin  *  shows  that  every  godly  man  has  a  right 
to  the  sacraments  and  to  church  fellowship;  yet  to 
the  sacraments  only  in  virtue  of  his  church  relation, 
as  every  freeman  has  a  right  to  the  comforts  of  the 
marriage  state,  but  is  entitled  to  them  only  through 
marriage  itself.  Samuel  Mather*  represents  Cot- 
ton as  having  declared  to  his  congregation,  that,  if 
even  "  a  poor  Indian  should  step  forth  and  say,  I 
love  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity  and  truth, 
and  should  testify  his  willingness  to  walk  according 
to  the  gospel,  though  his  defects  were  great  for 
ignorance  and  the  like,  he  should  be  for  admitting 
him  to  the  Lord's  table."  —  See  Creeds. 

'  Ch.  Gov.  259.     2  Apology,  86,  note. 

FELLOWSHIP  of  various  kinds  and  degrees.  — 

Goodwin^  shows  that  fellowship  is  of  three  kinds; 

Personal,  in  secret  duties ;  mystical,  common  to  all 

the  saints ;  and  in  a  communion  in  an  instituted 

church. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  255. 

FELLOWSHIP,  rules  of  —  Owen,  in  his  Eshcol, 


FUNDAMENTALS.  183 

or  Duty  of  Walking  in  Fellowship,*  says  the  rule 
of  walking  in  fellowship  is  "  cheerfully  to  undergo 
the  lot  of  the  whole  church  in  prosperity  and  afflic- 
tion, and  not  to  draw  back  under  any  pretence 
whatever."  That  which  leads  to  shrink  from  one 
duty  will  lead  to  shrink  from  other  duties,  till  the 
member  becomes  a  backslider.  Another  rule  which 
he  lays  down  ^  is.  Watching  over  and  admonishing 
every  brother,  and  telling  the  church  if  he  be  not 
reclaimed.  He  shows  ^  that  telling  the  elders  is 
not  telling  the  church. 

» In  Works,  xix.  98.     «  ib.  103.    ^  lb.  106. 

FLIGHT  in  persecution  is  admissible.  —  So  argued 
John  Robinson,  in  his  Answer  to  Helwisse,'  and 
applied  the  argumentum  ad  hominem  (i.e.  applied  it 
personally). 

*  In  Han.  i.  265 ;  and  Works,  iii.  159. 

FORMS,  wee6?/e55  in  ordinances. —  Cotton  Mather, 
in  his  Ratio  Disciplinae,*  speaking  of  ordination, 
says :  "  For  these  things  the  churches  of  New 
England  have  no  forms.  They  are-  instructed  and 
united  in  the  substance,  and  their  not  being  tied  to 
forms  does  but  give  them  the  delight  of  the  more 
variety  in  expressions  and  in  circumstances." 

*  Pages  40,  41. 

FUNDAMENTALS  of  Christianity.  —■  As  the 
Consrej^ational  rule  is,  Union  with  all  who  em- 
brace  the  fundamentals  of  Christianity,  there  will 
still  be  a  want  of  agreement  just  so  far  as  they  dis- 


184  FUNDAMENTALS. 

agree  as  to  what  the  fundamentals  of  Christianity 
are.  The  Independents  presented  to  Parliament 
sixteen  articles,  which  they  deemed  fundamental. 
These  embrace  the  usual  orthodox  views  of  God, 
the  Scripture,  the  atonement,  total  depravity,  justi- 
fication by  faith,  the  damnableness  of  continuing 
in  known  sin,  worshipping  God  according  to  his 
will,  the  resurrection,  and  the  final  judgment  and 
retribution.  They  are  plain  and  simple,  and  con- 
tain nothing  objectionable  to  any  evangelical 
Christian.  They  may  be  seen  at  length  in  Neal's 
Puritans.*  Watts,  in  his  Foundation  of  a  Christian 
Church,"  says  that  the  fundamentals  required  to 
be  professed  will  be  different,  according  to  the  dif- 
ferent degrees  of  light  of  the  professor.  They 
should  include  such  knowledge  as  is  essential  to 
Christianity.  He  gives  a  list'  of  substantial  arti- 
cles, all  very  fundamental  save  the  one  on  infant 
baptism,  which  he  pleads  is  fundamental  to  the 
peace  of  the  church,  though  not  of  Christianity. 
He  maintains,'*  that  confessions  of  faith  made  to 
the  church  should  be  confined  to  no  set  form  of  ex- 
pression, and  declaims  against  those  set  confessions 
which  exclude  for  nonconformity  to  one  little  point 
or  word.  Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,^  says; 
Mr.  Cotton  lately  preached  a  sermon,  showing  that 
there  are  twelve,  which  tried  by,  any  church  may 
.receive  them  in.  They  are  substantially  these ;  — 
The  Trinity;  God's  universal  government;  God 
only  to  be  worshipped  ;  his  worship  is  instituted  in 
the  Scriptures ;  the  fallen  state  of  man  ;  inability  to" 
save  ourselves  ;  incarnation  for  the  work  of  redemp- 


FUNERALS.  185 

tion ;  salvation  offered  only  to  believers ;  no  man 
can  come  to  Christ,  except  the  Father  draw  him 
by  his  word  and  Spirit;  justifying  grace;  the  jus- 
tified regenerated  and  sanctified  ;  imperfect  sanc- 
tification  in  this  life.  Ignorance  concerning  the 
foundation  of  the  church,  as  baptism,  imposition 
of  hands,  &c.,  he  argues,  should  not  hinder  from 
admission.  —  See  Confessions  of  Faith;  Creeds. 

»  Vol.  ii.  143.     2  Vol.  iii.  256.     =*  lb.  258—262.    *  lb.  262,  263. 
*  In  Hist.  See.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  iii.  69,  70. 

FUNERALS.  —  Our  Puritan  fathers  saw  so  much 
superstition  connected  with  the  burial  service,  con- 
secrated ^aveyards,  and  the  like,  that  they,  for  a 
time,  almost  wholly  discarded  all  funerals.  The 
First  Independent  Church  in  England  say,  in  their 
Confession,  art.  xxiii. :  *  "  Concerning  making  mar- 
riage, and  burying  the  dead,  we  believe  that  they 
are  no  actions  of  a  church  minister,  neither  are 
ministers  called  to  any  such  business;  neither  is 
there  so  much  as  one  example  of  any  such  practice 
in  the  whole  Book  of  God,  either  under  the  law  or 
under  the  gospel ;  without  which  warrant  we  believe 
it  unlawful,  whatsoever  any  minister  doth,  at  any 
time  and  place,  especially  as  a  part  of  his  ministe- 
rial office  and  function."  Cotton  Mather,  in  his 
Ratio  DisciplinsB,-  says  of  the  New  England  prac- 
tice :  "  In  many  towns,  the  ministers  make  agree- 
able prayers  with  the  people,  come  together  at  the 
house  to  attend  the  funeral  of  the  dead,  and  in 
some  they  make  a  short  speech  at  the  grave:  in 
other  places,  both  these  things  are  wholly  omitted. 
16« 


186  GOVERNMENT. 

However,  they  are  not  forbidden,  as  in  the  French 
churches,  where  the  prohibition  runs,  '  There  shall 
be  no  prayer  or  sermon  at  funerals,  to  shun  super- 
stition.' "  The  Apology  of  the  Overseers,  &c.,  of 
the  English  Church  at  Amsterdam,  says '  ministers 
should  not  be  burdened  with  civil  affairs,  as  mar- 
riages, burials,  &c.  Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,* 
shows  that  they  have  funerals  without  reading  or 
sermons,  but  in  silence.  Dr.  Ware,  in  his  History 
of  the  Old  North  and  New  Brick  Churches,*  says : 
"  Dr.  Samuel  Mather,  at  his  own  request,  received 
a  private  funeral  in  1785."     (How?) 

^In  Han.  i.  300.  ^  Page  117.  ^  Pages  37—61.  *  In  Hist. 
Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  iii.  94.     *  Page  23. 

GIFTS,  lueekhj.  —  Jacob's  Church  say,  in  their 
Confession,  art.  xxv.^  of  gifts  and  offerings:  "  Though 
they  be  free  and  voluntary  in  the  givers,  touching 
the  particular  quantity,  yet  that  they  do  thus  give 
and  offer  every  Lord's  day  is  a  very  commandment 
of  God,  and  a  point  of  necessary  obedience  in  man." 
See  Collections,  weekly. 

1  In  Han.  i.  300. 

GIFTS  luhich  God  gave  to  men.  —  Goodwin  * 
shows  that  these  are  pastors,  teachers,  and  church 
officers. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  263. 

GOVERNMENT,  church,  instituted  in  the  Scrip- 
tures.—  John  Milton,  in  his  Treatise  against  Prela- 
cy,* says  and  demonstrates  ""that  such  government 


GOVERNMENT.  187 

is  set  down  in  the  Scriptures,  and  that  to  teach 
otherwise  is  unsound  and  untrue.^^  J.  Burroughs,  in 
his  Sermon  before  Parliament,^  says :  "  Ecclesiasti- 
cal government,  being  of  divine  institution,  must  be 
the  same  where  churches  are  complete."  Prince, 
in  his  Chronology,^  says  of  the  founders  of  Ply- 
mouth church  and  colony :  "  They  observed  God's 
institutions  as  their  only  rule  in  church  order,  dis- 
cipline, and  worship."  J.  Corbett,  in  his  Principles 
and  Practice  of  Several  Nonconformists,  says  :  ^ 
"  We  believe  that  it  is  Christ's  high  prerogative, 
transcending  all  human  authority,  to  institute  spiri- 
tual officers."  Goodwin  taught  the  same  doctrine 
abundantly  in  his  Church  Government.  —  Seei 
Churchcs,  instituted  bodies. 

>  Works,  i.  84.     ^  Page  33.    »  Page  5.     ^  Page  4. 

GOVERNMENT,  church,  not  lawful  to  alter.— 
Pierce,  in  his  Vindication  of  Dissenters,^  quotes 
from  Wickliffe:  "'Tis  not  lawful  for  a  Christian, 
after  the  full  publication  of  the  law  of  Christ,  to 
devise  to  himself  any  other  laws  for  the  government 
of  the  church."  Eaton  and  Taylor,  in  their  De- 
fence,^ say  :  "  The  way  of  discipline  is  one  and 
essentially  unchangeable."     1  Tim.  vi.  13,  14. 

» In  Punchard's  Hist.  161.     ^  Page  107. 

GOVERNMENT,  church,  should  it  be  varied  to  suit 
circumstances  ?  —  Answer :  When  God  thus  alters 
it.  Goodwin  shows  ^  that,  under  the  patriarchal 
dispensation,  it  was  in  the  head  of  the  family  ; 
under  the  Mosaic,  it  was  hierarchal ;  and  under  the 


188  GOVERNMENT. 

Christian,  when  the  church  was  to  be  dispersed 
among  all  the  nations,  it  was  made  congregational. 
Burton,  in  his  Vindication  of  Independent  Churches, 
in  answer  to  Prynne's  Twelve  Considerable  Ques- 
tions,^ shows  that,  in  case  it  might  be  varied  with- 
out his  direction,  it  might  be  obliged  to  conform 
to  that  which  is  unscriptural ;  and  that  the  gospel 
might  just  as  well  be  varied,  and  sent  to  different 
countries  garbled  to  suit  the  wishes  of  the  rulers 
and  the  people. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  175.     2  In  Han.  ii.  389—393. 

GOVERNMENT,  church,  in  the  people.  ^Roh'm- 
%on  ^  says :  "  It  should  seem,  then,  that  it  appertains 
to  the  people,  .  .  .  unto  the  people  primarily,  under 
Christ,  to  rule  and  govern  the  church."  Goodwin, 
in  his  Church  Government,^  maintains  the  same 
doctrine,  and  discusses  it  at  large.  The  Puritan 
ministers  of  England,  in  their  Letter  to  the  Gene- 
ral Assembly  of  Scotland  in  1641,^  assert  that  "  the 
whole  power  of  government,  and  all  acts  thereto 
pertaining,  are,  by  divine  ordinance,  in  for o  externo, 
to  be  determined  by  the  most  voices  in  and  of  every 
particular  congregation.  They  moreover  plainly 
intimate  that  their  acts  ought  to  be  determined 
"without  any  authoritative  —  though  not  without 
a  consultatory  —  interposition."  Mitchell,  in  his 
Guide,*  says :  "  The  church,  though  destitute  of  a 
minister,  is  still  competent  to  discipline,  though  the 
presence  and  aid  of  a  pastor  is  very  desirable."  — 
See  Elder,  is  one,  or  more,  necessary  to  the  chiircJi's 
power  to  act  ?     Ministers,  authority  of  what  ?     Pas- 


GOVERNMENT.  189 

TOR,  has  he  a  negative  vote  ?  Power,  installed  in 
ministry  or  brethren?  Ministers,  people  may  do 
their  luork  for  them,  if  they  neglect  it.  —  See  also 
the  next  article. 

^  In  his  Apolojjy,  in  Punchard's  Hist.  347  ;  and  "Works,  iii.  34. 
2  Page  44—49.     ^  in  Han.  ii.  98.     ■*  Page  94. 

GOVERNMENT,  church  ;  is  it  mixed  ?  —  Not- 
withstanding the  old  Congregationalists  so  strenu- 
ously maintained  that  the  government  was  in  the 
people,  yet  they  took  pains  to  argue  that  it  was  a 
mixed  one.  This  they  did  to  avoid  the  imputation 
of  democratic  sentiments  and  practices.  Jacob,  in 
his  Divine  Beginning  and  Institution  of  Christ's 
Visible  Churches,*  maintains  that  it  is  demooratical 
as  to  the  necessity  of  the  free  consent  of  the  people ; 
aristocratical  so  far  as  the  direction  of  the  elders 
"and  pastors  is  concerned ;  and  also  partly  monar- 
chical, alluding  doubtless  to  Christ's  rule  over  it, 
which  is  acknowledged  by  all.  Hooker,  in  his  Sur- 
vey,^ and  Cambridge  Platform,®  assert  the  same 
thing  in  similar  language ;  yet  they  are  careful  to 
put  an  effectual  check  on  the  aristocratical  power 
of  the  elders,  in  making  them  amenable  to  the 
church  for  mal-administration.  The  language  of 
the  Platform^  is:  "Church  government  or  rule  is 
placed  by  Christ  in  the  officers  of  the  church,  who 
are  therefore  called  rulers,  while  they  rule  with  God. 
Yet,  in  case  of  mal-administration,  they  are  sub- 
ject to  the  power  of  the  church."  This  explanation 
puts  an  end  to  the  idea  of  an  irresponsible  vetoing 
aristocracy ;  a  sentiment  not  likely  to  prevail  among 


190  GOVERNMENT. 

Americans  of  this  age. —  See  the  cross-references 
under  the  last  preceding  article. 

'  In  Han.  i.  228.     =  Part  i.  206.     '-^  Chap.  x.     *  Page8  39,  40. 

GOVERNMENT,  Congregational^  how  distin- 
guished. —  Hooker,  in  his  Survey,^  among  other 
distinguishing  points,  notices  these :  The  power  of 
judgment  is  not  the  power  of  office.  The  people 
are  superior  to  their  elders  in  point  of  censure,  and 
do  not  give  away  the  power  of  judgment  when  they 
choose  an  officer.  The  officers  may  call  them  to- 
gether, enjoin  them  to  hear,  enjoin  silence,  and  dis- 
solve (?)  the  meeting  when  they  act  disorderly. 
The  power  of  judgment  is  in  the  chvixoh.  formaliteVy 
in  the  rulers  directive,  Mitchell  says  :  ^  "  The  things 
which  distinguish  the  Congregational  plan  from 
others  are  two :  the  importance  it  gives  to  the  bro- 
therhood, in  matters  of  discipline  and  government; 
and  the  independence  of  the  churches  of  foreign 
control  or  supervision.  .  .  .  The  powers  of  govern- 
ment are  vested  in  the  church  as  a  body  with  its 
officers ;  the  latter  acting  in  their  official  capacity, 
as  the  guides  and  the  executive  of  the  church."  — 
See  Congregationalism,  epitome  of  principles  of. 

»  Part  i.  191—196.     =  Guide,  57. 

GOVERNMENT,  civile  what  obedience  do  we  owe 
it  .^  —  I  quote  several  old  writers  on  this  point,  ob- 
serving the  order  only  of  the  pages  of  the  books 
quoted.  Bridge,  in  his  Wounded  Conscience 
Cured,^  quotes  several  German,  French  Protestant, 
Genevan,   Dutch,    Scotch,    and    English    divines. 


GOVERNMENT.  191 

maintaining  that  if  the  prince  turn  traitor,  and  the 
people  resist,  they  are  not  rebels.  He  says  :  ^  "  The 
power  (of  government)  abstractly  is  from  God  ;  .  .  . 
•the  designation  of  the  person  that  is  to  work  .  .  . 
under  this  power  is  of  man. .  .  .  We  leave  this  power 
where  we  found  it.  But,  if  the  person  entrusted 
with  that  power  shall  not  discharge  his  trust,  it  falls 
to  the  people  to  see  to  it ;  which  they  do  as  an  act 
of  self-defence,  not  of  jurisdiction  over  their  prince." 
He  shows '  that  "  there  is  a  difference  between  dis- 
posing of  a  thing  by  way  of  donation,  and  by  way 
of  TRUST : "  the  one  may,  and  the  other  may  not, 
be  resumed.  The  power  of  the  prince  he  holds 
to  be  only  a  trust-power.  But  "if  the  conqueror 
conquer  the  whole  kingdom,  and  keep  them  under 
by  conquest  only,  why  may  not  the  subjects  rise, 
and  take  up  arms,  and  deliver  themselves  from 
slavery?"  J.  Burroughs,  in  his  Glorious  Name  of 
the  Lord  of  Hosts,*  notes  several  things  which  the 
spirit  of  a  Christian  should  not  bear ;  viz.  "  A  natu- 
ral slavery  in  these  three  things :  his  property,  which 
God  and  nature  hath  given  him,  to  be  wholly  at 
the  will  of  another  .  .  .  ;  subjection  to  a  government 
that  he  has  in  no  way  yielded  assent  unto  .  .  .  ; 
and  to  be  in  such  a  situation,  that,  whatsoever 
he  does,  he  shall  receive  nothing  for  it  by  way  of 
justice,  but  merely  of  favor.  This  is  slavery,  which 
an  ingenuous  spirit  cannot  bear."  In  his  Answer 
to  Fearne,*  he  says :  The  apostle  does  not  say, 
Whosoever  resists  the  highest  man  resists  the  ordi- 
nance of  God,  but  Whosoever  shall  resist  exousia 
(the  authority,  not  dunamis,  mere  force).    He  infers  * 


192  GOVERNMENT. 

that  we  are  subject  to  the  king's  power,  i.e.  what 
the  laws  give  him,  but  not  to  his  will.  The  apostle 
requires  us  not  to  resist  the  exousia^  but  does  not 
require  us  not  to  resist  tyranny.  The  power  is  of« 
God,  but  designing  the  person  to  exercise  that  power 
is  anthropine  ktisis,  a  human  creature,  1  Pet.  ii.  13. 
The  right  to  govern  comes  not  from  conquering, 
but  from  some  agreement  antecedent  or  consequent. 
He  maintains  that  acting  without  law  is  not  an 
abuse  of  any  lawful  power,  but  only  usurpation  and 
tyranny.  Hannah  Adams,  in  her  History  of  New 
England,^  says:  The  influential  characters  in  New 
England  maintained  that  "  birth  is  no  necessary 
cause  of  subjection ; "  and  that,  when  they  re- 
moved, they  owed  no  subjection  but  a  voluntary 
one,  founded  on  their  compact  with  the  king.  Cot- 
ton pleaded  that  "  government  is  a  theocracy,"  and 
that  none  but  the  pious  should  be  chosen  rulers, 
and  that  magistrates  should  have  coercive  power 
over  churches !  ^  Withers,  in  his  History  of  Resist- 
ance,^ says:  The  late  Lord  Chief  Justice  (Holt), 
at  the  time  of  the  abdication  of  James  H.,  decided 
that  "  he  who  hath  a  trust,  acting  contrary,  is  a  dis- 
claimer of  the  trust."  Baynes,  in  his  Diocesan's 
TriaV^  says:  "If  kings  be  not  absolute  monarchs, 
it  was  never  deemed  absurd  to  say  that  their  people 
had  power,  in  some  cases,  to  depose  them."  Dr. 
William  Ames  the  younger,  in  his  Legislative 
Power  is  Christ's  Prerogative,  maintains  that  all 
legislative  power  is  from  him,  and  that  men  are 
bound  to  obey  all  laws  which  are  right  and  proper, 
and  not  those  which  come  of  the  ten  horns  of  the 


GOVERNMENT.  193 

beast.  Philip  Nye,  in  his  Oath  of  Supremacy  Law- 
ful, and  the  Power  of  the  King  in  Civil  Affairs, 
says : "  "  All  men  are  by  nature  equal,"  and  yet 
lamely  argues  the  divine  right  of  kings.  JHe  as- 
serts''^ that  no  power,  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  can 
enforce  the  soul.  He  argues  ^^  that  the  civil  magis- 
trate, and  not  classes,  ought  to  have  a  power  of 
jurisdiction  over  the  several  congregations  in  his 
dominions.  Pierce,  in  his  Vindication  of  Dissent- 
ers,** says:  The  Puritans  admit  that  the  power  of 
magistrates  is  from  God,  but  the  power  to  desig- 
nate the  magistrate  is  in  the  people.  In  the  High 
Church  Politics,"  it  is  asserted  that,  in  1683,  twenty- 
seven  propositions  were  condemned  by  the  Univer- 
sity of  Oxford,  among  which  are,  —  "  All  civil 
authority  is  derived  originally  from  the  people. 
There  is  a  mutual  compact,  tacit  or  express,  be- 
tween a  prince  and  his  subjects;  and,  if  he  perform 
not  his  duty,  they  are  discharged  from  theirs.  If 
lawful  governors  become  tyrants,  and  govern  other- 
wise than  by  the  laws  of  God  and  man  they  ought 
to  do,  they  forfeit  the  right  they  had  to  their  go- 
vernment. .  .  .  The  doctrine  of  the  patient  suffering 
of  injuries  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  violent  re- 
sisting of  the  higher  powers,  in  case  of  persecution 
for  religion.  There  lies  no  obligation  upon  Chris- 
tians to  passive  obedience,  when  the  prince  com- 
mands any  thing  against  the  laws  of  our  country  ; 
and  the  primitive  Christians  chose  rather  to  die 
than  to  resist,  because  Christianity  was  not  yet 
established  as  the  laws  of  the  empire."  We  are 
told,'®  that  Dr.  Sacheverell,  in  his  Fifth  of  Novem- 
17 


194  GRAVES. 

ber  Sermon,  1709,  before  the  Lord  Mayor  and  Al- 
dermen of  London,  said :  "  The  grand  security  of 
our  government,  and  the  very  pillar  on  which  it  is 
founded,  is  a  steady  belief  of  the  subject's  obliga- 
tion to  an  absolute  and  unconditional  obedience  lo 
the  supreme  power  in  all  things  lawful,  and  the 
illegality  of  resistance  under  any  pretence  ivhatever.^^ 
And  we  are  also  informed,  that  these  passages 
made  the  groundwork  of  his  impeachment/^  He 
defended  himself  on  the  ground  that  it  was  "  the 
doctrine  of  the  church." —  See  Goldsmith's  History 
of  England,  iii.  Ill — 115;  and  Abridgment,  200, 
201,  on  reign  of  Queen  Anne.     See  Resistance. 

»  Pages  6,  7.  ^  lb.  20.  ^  lb.  41,  42.  *  Page  94.  °  Page  2. 
«  lb.  7—14.  '  Page  32.  «  lb.  34.  ^  Page  19.  ^^  Page  88. 
»i  Page  17.  ''^Ib.  32.  i^  lb.  41— 43.  »4  p^gg  319.  '^  Page  88. 
"lb.  96.     "lb.  99. 

GRAVES,  their  position.  —  In  the  reign  of  super- 
stition under  Elizabeth,  one  of  the  primary  ones  of 
Bishop  Wren's  ridiculous  articles  of  visitation  was. 
Are  your  churchyards  duly  consecrated  ?  and  "  Are 
the  graves  due  east  and  west,  and  their  bodies 
buried  with  their  heads  to  the  west? "  ^  Men  who 
despised  the  law  of  conformity  to  such  idle  ceremo- 
nies, when  they  came  to  this  wilderness  took  evident 
pains  to  disregard  this  rule,  as  may  be  still  seen  in 
some  of  our  old  graveyards,  particularly  in  See- 
konk,  Mass.*  Mr.  Newman,  the  pastor  there,  had 
been  seven  times  obliged  to  flee  his  parish  in  Eng- 
land, on  account  of  his  nonconformity.    The  studied 

♦  I  have  it  from  good  authority  that  the  samo  is  true  of  the 
old  graveyard  in  Plymouth. 


HABITS.  195 

irregularity  of  these  graves  speaks  a  language  like 
the  round  cap  of  the  Puritan  divines,  not  very 
beautiful  in  itself;  but,  when  the  law  required  an 
oath  of  the  necessity  of  a  square  one,  it  spoke  like 
Daniel's  open  window,  when  he  prayed  to  the  God 
of  heaven  in  defiance  of  the  decree  of  the  king. — 
See  Ceremonies,  Habits,  Nonconformity. 

'  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  324,  325. 

HABITS,  Popish,  rejected.  —  This  was  done  be- 
cause the  common  people  then  held  them  sacred  on 
account  of  their  consecration.  One  of  the  first  con- 
siderable moves  towards  nonconformity  was  on  the 
occasion  of  Bishop  Hooper's  refusing  to  be  made  a 
bishop  in  these  habits.*  Here  rose  up,  or  rather 
greatly  increased,  the  Puritans,  who  held  that  things 
indifferent  in  themselves  ought  not  to  be  required 
by  law,  to  the  ensnaring  of  men's  consciences;^ 
and  multitudes  lost  their  livings  by  the  act  of  uni- 
formity.^ Bucer  and  Peter  Martyr  both  inveighed 
against  the  habits.  Bucer  would  not  wear  the 
square  cap,  "  because  his  head  was  not  square."  * 
The  foreign  divines,  when  consulted,  all  decided 
against  these  habits ;  yet  they  were  pressed,  and 
multitudes  ol  the  best  ministers  in  the  land  lost 
their  places  rather  than  conform.  The  question 
was  not  about  the  mere  trifle,  whether  they  should 
wear  a  cap  or  surplice,  but  whether  they  should  wear 
such  a  one  as  would  ensnare  weak  consciences,  and 
lead  them  to  idolatry.  Whoever  would  understand 
this  controversy  should  study  Neal's  History  of  the 
Puritans,  i.  51 — 107,  and  much  else  in  this  valua- 


196  HABITS. 

ble  work.  Wearing  these  habits,  they  considered, 
would  be  understood  as  approving  of  many  Popish 
superstitions.  (See  Bradshaw's  Treatise  on  Wor- 
ship, pages  1,  16.)  Neal,  in  his  History  of  Ne\Y 
England,*  says :  The  first  set  of  Protestant  bishops 
under  Elizabeth  were  opposed  to  the  habits.  "  Grin- 
dal  calls  God  to  witness,  that  it  did  not  lie  at  their 
door  that  they  were  not  quite  taken  away."  Pierce, 
in  his  Vindication  of  Dissenters,  says :  ^  "  Burnett 
tells  us,  that  Cranmer  and  Ridley  designed  to  have 
procured  an  act  to  abolish  the  Popish  garments;" 
and  ^  that  "  John  Rogers  positively  refused  to  wear 
the  habits,  unless  the  Popish  priests  were  ejijoined 
to  wear  upon  their  sleeves  a  chalice  with  a  host." 
When  they  pulled  off  Latimer's  garments  at  his 
degradation,  he  said :  "  Now  I  can  make  no  more 
holy  water."  He  and  Bucer  were  both  opposed  to 
the  habits.  And  ^  he  shows  that  the  habits  have 
always  been  offensive  to  good  men,  churchmen  as 
well  as  dissenters.  R.  Parker,  in  his  book  Against 
Symbolizing  with  Antichrist,  especially  in  the  Sign 
of  the  Cross,  says :  ^  They  say  the  cross  and  surplice 
"  being  consecrate  to  his  service,  they  begin  to  be 
the  things  of  God,  yea,  parts  of  God,  whose  worship 
is  a  worship  of  God,  as  the  purple  is  wont  to  be 
worshipped  with  the  king :  .  .  .  images  and  crosses 
must  be  adored,  like  holy  vessels,  holy  books,  holy 
vestments,  with  the  like."  He  asserts  ^°  that  the 
cross,  surplice,  &c.,  are  "  incurable  and  irrecouerable 
idolothites,"  and  proceeds  to  prove  it,  showing  that 
things  ill  consecrate  necessarily  become  unholy. 
Prince,  in  his  Chronology,"  informs  us  that  Fuller 


HALF-WAY   COVENANT.  197 

says  that  John  Rogers  and  Bishop  Hooper  were 
the  heads  of  the  reformers  called  Puritans.  Hooper 
refused  to  comply  with  the  habits;  and  the  matter 
progressed  till  Archbishop  Cranmer,  Bishop  Ridley, 
Bishop  Latimer,  Dr.  Taylor,  Mr.  Philpot,  Mr.  Brad- 
ford, and  other  glorious  martyrs,  came  into  the  same 
sentiments.  The  whole  case  is  described  in  sect.  ii. 
part  ii.  —  See  Ceremonies. 

'Hist.Puritans,i.pref.ix.  51,52.  2ib.79.  lb.  77.  '•lb.  92. 
»  Neal's  N.  Eng.  i.  48.  «  Page  11.  '  lb.  32.  »  lb.  476.  »  Page  8. 
'ojb.  9.     "  Pages  212— 216. 

HALF-WAY  COVENANT.  —  This  was  a  doc- 
trine which,  having  previously  taken  root,  prevailed 
to   a  considerable   extent  in  the  last   half  of  the 
seventeenth  and  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  centu- 
ries.    To  give  an  adequate  analysis  of  the  contro- 
versies on  the  subject  would  be  to  compose  quite  a 
volume.     Dr.  Harris,  a  seeming  advocate  for  the 
doctrine  in  the  present  century,^  calls  on  such  as 
have  taken  this  covenant  to  fulfil  their  vows,  main- 
taining^ that  it  is  just  as  binding  a§  the  covenant 
of  full  communion.      Stoddard,  in  his   Instituted 
Churches,  carried  the  doctrine  so  far,  that  he  asserts^ 
that  infants  descended  from  parents  under  church 
censure  are  not  to  be  denied  baptism ;  and  *  that 
the  baptized  are  not  to  be  debarred  the  communion 
for  the  want  of  the  exercise  of  faith.     Increase  Ma- 
ther was  one  of  the  great  champions  of  this  doctrine, 
having  been  brought  over  in  a  dispute  with  Mitchell 
of  Cambridge.     He  tells  us  plainly,  in  the  epistle 
to  the  reader,  in  his  First  Principles  of  New  Eng- 
17* 


198  HALF-WAY    COVENANT. 

land  concerning  Baptism,  that  he  had  changed  hia 
mind  on  this  point.      He   argues  from  authority, 
asserting  that  the  members  of  the  Synod  of  1662 
had  greater  facilities  for  understanding  the  truth  on 
this  subject  than  others.     He  maintains  Mhat  it  is 
not  an  innovation,  as  some  suppose,  but  was  the 
do(;trine  of  the  first  fathers  of  New  England.     (See 
Baptism,  who  are  subjects  of?)     The  great  scope  of 
the  book  is  an  attempt  to  prove,  that  the  doctrine 
of  the  Synod  of  1662  was  no  innovation.     Eliot, 
in    his    Ecclesiastical    History   of   Massachusetts,^ 
says:    "It  was  a  very  great  innovation;"  and  he 
tells  us  that  "  Mr.  AUin  of  Dedham  replied  to  the 
Anti-synodalia  of  Chauncy ;  R.  Mather  to  Daven- 
port (who  wrote  against  the  result  of  synod) ;  and 
Mitchell  to  Increase  Mather.     Some  say  that  Mr. 
Davenport  overthrew  the  arguments  of  the  synod, 
though  they  do  not  like  his  reasoning  on  the  whole." 
President  Edwards,  in  his  Treatise  on  Full  Com- 
munion,^ shows  that  "  they  who  pretend  to  own  the 
covenant,  and  do  not  profess  piety,  do  rather  reject 
it."     The  preface  to  this  essay,  by  Prince,  Webb, 
Foxcroft,  and  Byles,  asserts  that  its  doctrines  were 
maintained  by  the  fathers  of  this  country,  above 
threescore   years,  without   dissension.      Hemmen- 
way,  in  his  Remarks  on  Dr.  Emmons's  Dissertation, 
takes  the  ground  that  baptized  children  are  all  in 
covenant  with  God.     Dr.  Emmons,  in  his  Disserta- 
tion, maintains  the  contrary.     President  Chauncy, 
in  his  Anti-synodalia,  maintains  that  his  doctrine 
had  "been  the  judgment  and  the  practice  in  the 
Bay  Patent  (some  few  inconsiderable  excepted)  for 


HALF-WAY    COVENANT.  199 

the  space  of  thirty  years.  He  says  ^  that  "  it  is  a 
palpable  untruth  for  an  unbeliever  to  engage  him- 
self to  keep  the  Lord's  covenant."  He  maintains 
everywhere,  that  the  baptized  are  under  church 
watch,  personally  to  warn  them,  but  they  are  not 
in  covenant. 

For  the  origin  of  the  movement  in  favor  of  the 
half-way  covenant,  it  appears  that  the  General 
Court  of  Connecticut  called  a  council,  which  de- 
creed it  in  1657 ;  but  that  the  churches  generally 
considered  it  an  innovation  on  the  principles  of 
Congregationalism,  and  were  so  warmly  opposed 
to  it,  that  it  could  not  be  effected  without  a  synod.* 
In  1662,  the  Synod  in  Boston  decided  in  favor  of 
it,  but  against  considerable  opposition.  The  Gene- 
ral Court  of  Connecticut  then  *°  "required  the  mini- 
sters and  churches  to  inquire  whether  they  should 
not  receive  all  who  have  a  competency  of  know- 
ledge to  their  communion."  Trumbull  further 
asserts,"  that  few  churches  admitted  the  half-way 
covenant  for  many  years,  and  some  never  did.  He 
says :  *^  "  It  does  not  appear,  that  in  1667  so  much 
as  one  church  in  the  colony  "  had  assented  to  the 
half-way  covenant.  In  this  year  a  synod  met  by 
order  of  the  General  Court,  consisting  of  all  the 
preaching  elders  in  the  colony,  and  certain  selected 
ones  in  Massachusetts  (evidently  to  carry  a  point) ; 
but  they  still  failed,  and  found  that  the  clergy  and 
people  would  not  give  up  their  private  opinions 
to  the  decisions  of  councils.  "Whoever  reads  the 
thirteenth  and  eighteenth  chapters  of  Trumbull's 
History  will  see  that  the  churches  and  ministers 


200  HOLY   DAYS. 

nobly  withstood  the  encroachments  of  state  autho- 
rity, and  only  yielded  to  virtual  force  and  power. 
Since  the  days  of  President  Edwards,  the  practice 
has  gone  into  disuse  in  the  orthodox  churches. — 
See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  224—231 ;  Punchard's  View, 
251.  See  Baptism,  does  it  admit  to  the  church? 
Does  it  make  infants  members  ?  Subjects  of;  Voters. 

^  Sermon  on  Covenant  Engagements,  20.  ^  lb.  12.  ^  Page  18. 
<  lb.  20.  <*  Pages  1,  2.  «  In  Hist.  See.  Col.  series  ii.  vol.  i.  201— 
205.  '  Page  32.  »  Page  30.  »  Trumbull's  Hist.  Conn.  318.  '°  lb. 
326.     "  lb.  327.     ^^  ib.  482. 

HERESY. —  The  popular  notion  of  a  heretic  is  a 
believer  in  doctrines  fundamentally  false.  But  the 
true  idea  of  one,  according  to  Congregational  princi- 
ples, is,  in  the  language  of  Mitchell,^  "  a  leader  of  a 
faction,  raised  commonly  on  the  ground  of  his  pecu- 
liar doctrinal  opinions,  but  applicable  to  any  factious 
leader,  whether  the  division  be  for  doctrines,  mea- 
sures, or  men."  On  this  ground,  the  appellation 
"  heretic "  often  falls,  like  any  curse  causeless,  on 
the  head  of  him  who  opprobriously  utters  it.  John 
Cook,  in  his  pamphlet.  What  the  Independents 
Would  Have,^  says:  "He  (i.e.  an  Independent) 
believes  that  a  heretic  is  but  to  be  rejected,  and,  as 
Luther  said,  to  be  burned  with  the  fire  of  charity." 

^  Guide,  98.     ^  in  Han.  iii.  256. 

HOLY  DAY'S,  extra^  unlawful.  —  Jacob's  Church, 
in  their  Confession,^  say  (artxxii.):  "We  believe  that 
under  the  gospel  there  is  not  any  holy  day  besides 
the  Lord's  day."     John  Robinson,  in  his  Apology,'^ 


IDLENESS.  201 

speaks  of  them  as  "  reared  up  by  the  side  of  divine 
institutions,  much  more  holy  than  the  Lord's  day." 
He  condemns  the  making  other  days,  to  commemo- 
rate the  resurrection,  &c.,  than  the  one  which  is 
consecrated  by  Christ  himself  and  his  apostles. 
Isaac  Chauncy  says : '  "It  is  not  in  the  power  of 
the  church  to  set  apart  stated  times,  yearly  or 
monthly,  to  be  observed,  for  that  would  be  supersti- 
tion and  will-worship  (Gal.  iv.  10 ;  Col.  ii.  16,  17) ; 
but  days  of  fasting  and  humiliation  may  be  ap- 
pointed by  any  church,  according  as  weighty  rea- 
sons lead  thereto"  (Acts  xiv.  23).  Pierce,  in  his 
Vindication  of  Dissenters,*  shows  that  the  Scrip- 
tares  make  certain  the  identity  of  but  two  of  the 
extra  days  observed  as  holy;  that  two  of  them  are 
Sundays,  and  it  is  absurd  to  try  to  make  these 
more  holy.  It  is  uncertain  on  what  day  Christ  was 
born,  or  the  purification  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
occurred,  and  impious  to  thank  God  that  such 
things  took  place  on  such  and  such  days.  The 
articles  of  the  Leyden  Church  say:^  "  The  Sabbath 
is  the  only  day  which  is  set  apart,  as  holy  and  to 
be  kept  sacred,  in  the  Scriptures ;  but  churches  and 
congregations  are  at  liberty  to  set  apart  days  of 
fasting,  thanksgiving,  and  prayer." 

» In  Han.  i.  300.  ^  lb.  i.  381.  =  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches, 
91.     *  Page  502.     =  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  39,  249. 

IDLENESS  a  disciplinable  offence.  —  This  has 
ever  been  a  doctrine  of  Congregationalism,  founded 
on  2  Thess.  iii.  11—14  and  1  Tim.  v.  13.— See 
Elders,  their  office. 


202  IMPOSITION    OF   HANDS. 

IDOLATRY,  remnants  of^  discarded.  —  Robinson, 
in  his  answer  to  Hall,*  more  than  intimates  that  it 
is  idolatry  to  kneel  at  the  consecrated  bread;  so  of 
kneeling  to  the  ordinary,  when  we  take  the  oath 
at  his  hands.  Ainsworth,  in  his  Arrow  against 
Idolatry,*  reckons  the  consecrated  places,  imple- 
ments, and  even  ministers,  with  many  other  ceremo- 
nies, derived  from  idolatrous  Rome,  among  the 
idolatries  practised  by  the  English  church.  —  See 
Ceremonies;  Habits;  Kneeling. 

^  In  Han.  i.  194  ;  and  Works,  iii.  411.     ^  In  Han.  i.  238. 

IMPOSITION  OF  HANDS  in  ordination;  is  it 
necessary? — This  is  a  subject  concerning  which 
there  has  been  some  diversity  of  opinion,  both 
among  Congregationalists  and  other  reformed 
churches.  Goodwin* -maintains  that  it  is  one  of 
the  first  principles  of  the  Christian  religion.  Welde, 
in  his  Reply  to  Rathband,^  quotes  the  Answer  to 
the  Thirty-two  Questions,  page  67 :  "  Though  the 
essence  of  a  minister's  call  consists  in  his  election, 
yet  we  look  upon  ordination,  by  imposition  of  hands, 
as  necessary,  by  a  divine  institution."  Others,  as 
Dr.  Watts,''  suppose  that  "the  imposition  of  hands 
was  the  means  of  conveying  miraculous  powers." 
With  this  view,"*  it  was  not  practised  in  the  Dutch 
nor  the  French  churches;  nor  has  it  ever  been  used 
in  the  Scotch  churches  at  all.  This  is  recorded  as  a 
fact  bearing  on  the  controversy  between  Clyfton, 
Johnson,  and  Ainsworth.  It  is  asserted  that  in  the 
Scriptures  we  find  that  some  officers  were  admitted 
with  it,  and  some  without  it.     The  Independents  in 


IMPOSITION   OF   HANDS.  203 

the  "Westminster  Assembly  *  consented  to  the  cere 
mony,  ^^provided  it  was  attended  ivith  an  open 
declaration,  that  it  was  not  intended  as  a  conveyance 
of  office  power^  The  Savoy  Synod  ®  say :  "  The 
way  of  ordaining  officers  ...  is,  after  their  election 
by  the  suffrage  of  the  church,  to  set  them  apart  with 
fasting  and  prayer,  and  imposition  of  the  hands  of 
the  eldership  of  the  church,  though,  if  there  be  no 
imposition  of  hands,  they  are  rightly  constituted 
ministers  of  Christ."  But  they  do  not  allow,  that 
ordination  to  the  work  of  the  ministry,  though  it  be 
by  persons  rightly  ordained,  conveys  office-power 
without  a  previous  election  of  the  church.  Mr. 
Pemberton  ^  argues,  from  the  Scripture  instances  of 
ordination,  that  imposition  of  hands  may  not  be 
neglected  without  sin.  Isaac  Chauncy  ^  says  that 
there  is  not  the  least  mention  of  imposition  of  hands 
in  the  New  Testament,  where  the  translators  use  the 
word  ordination  in  its  proper  sense,  i.  e.  installii%  a 
person  into  office,  though  the  word  signifies  uplifting 
of  the  hands,  by  way  of  suffrage,  in  the  election  of 
officers.  He  maintains  ^  that  laying  on  of  hands 
conferred  extraordinary  gifts,  and  many  think  it 
obsolete.  He  concludes  ^°  that  it  is  an  obsolete 
ceremony,  w^hich  has  ceased,  and  assigns  sixteen 
reasons  for  his  conclusion,  among  which  are  the 
following:  —  The  end  and  signification  of  the  rite 
have  ceased ;  it  never  was  appropriate  to  the  ordina- 
tion of  ministers ;  most  of  the  apostles  were  ordafhed 
without  it,  and  no  ordinary  pastor  (that  we  read  of) 
ordained  with  it;  the  church's  solemn  and  pubUc 
election  is  ordination,  Acts  xiv.  23 ;  there  is  no  more 


204  IMPOSITION    OF    HANl^S. 

ground  for  the  continuance  of  this  rite  than  for  the 
washing  of  feet,  or  the  anointing  with  oil ;  it  has 
been  abused  by  Papists,  and  idolized  by  Protestants. 
Increase  Mather,  in  his  Order  of  the  New  England 
Churches,"  shows  at  length  that  imposition  of 
hands  is  indifferent,  while  election  is  indispensable 
to  a  pastor.  Notwithstanding  all  this,  our  fore- 
fathers, I  believe  universally,  practised  imposition 
of  hands  in  ordination,  and  usually  repeated  it  in 
installations.  The  latter  they  did  to  do  away  the 
impression  of  a  peculiar  unction  and  an  indelible 
character  made  by  ordination. —  See  Neander's 
Planting  and  Training  of  the  Church,  97,  98 ;  Up- 
ham's  Rat.  Dis.,  120;  Punchard's  View,  96,  and 
Bacon's  Church  Manual,  60;  Coleman's  Primitive 
Church,  139,  141. —  See  Calling;  Ordination, 
none  besides  election  necessary ;  Translation. 

*  Ch.  Gov.  262.  2  In  Han.  ii.  330.  ='  Serm.  at  the  Ordin.  of 
Deacons,  Works,  iii.  312.  *  Han.  i.  242,  243.  =  Neal's  Puritans, 
ii.  8.  ^  lb.  179.  'Ordin.  Serm.  of  Rev.  J.  Sewall,  6.-  »  Divine 
Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  68.  »  Page  74.  »"  Pages  78—83.  »'  Pages 
90—100. 

IMPOSITION  OF  HANDS,  bj/ioIiom?  —  'Rich?iYd 
Mather,  in  his  reply  to  Rutherford,^  maintains  that, 
because  the  Presbytery  laid  hands  on  Timothy,  it 
does  not  follow  that  no  others  may  engage  in  this 
ceremony.  Trumbull,  in  his  History  of  Connec- 
ticut,^ informs  us  that  Mr.  Fitch  was  ordained  at 
Sa^brook  in  1646  by  two  lay  brethren,  though  Mr. 
Hooker,  his  theological  instructor,  was  present ;  and 
that  they  did  the  same  in  1660,  at  the  ordination  of 
Mr.  Buckingham,  though  a  council  was  present. 


INDEPENDENCY.  205 

The  council  considered  it  an  innovation;  but  the 
brethren  were  tenacious  of  what  they  esteemed 
their  right,  and  it  could  not  be  prevented  without 
inconvenience.  The  same  year,  Mr.  Newton  was 
installed  at  Milford  by  a  ruling  elder  and  two 
brethren.  Isaac  Chauncy^  inquires:  "  Who  should 
ordain  when  there  is  no  elder?  Answer, —  Who 
should  do  it  but  the  church  that  called  him  ? .  .  . 
The  power  is  in  the  church  to  lay  on  hands,  if 
necessary,  by  some  brother  delegated  and  appointed 
thereto ;  for  foreign  ministers  cannot  do  an  authori- 
tative act  in  that  church."  —  See  Ordination  by 
the  people. 

>  In  Han.  ii.  188.   =*  Vol.  i.  299.   ^  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  70. 

IMPROVIDENCE  disciplinahle.—  MitcheW  says 
that  this  is  "  an  offence  against  nature,  justice,  and 
religion."  He  asserts  that  it  is  disciplinable,  accord- 
ing to  1  Tim.  V.  8. —  See  Idleness. 

»  Guide,  99. 

INDEPENDENCY,  what;  loherein  owned,  and 
wherein  denied,  —  This  word  has  two  technical  signi- 
fications, as  used  by  different  writers,  both  ancient 
and  modern.  Hence,  of  those  who  held  the  same 
sentiments,  we  often  find  one  lauding  and  the  other 
condemning  Independency.  In  one  of  these  signi- 
fications it  implies  merely  the  independency  of  the 
churches  from  all  juridical  power  out  of  themselves ; 
in  the  other,  that  one  church  has  no  right  to  call 
another  to  account,  and  pass  sentence  of  non-com- 
munion against  it.  Congregation alists  admit  the 
18 


206  INDEPENDENCY. 

first,  and  deny  the  second.  Hence  the  authors  of 
the  Cambridge  Platform  ^  say :  "  The  term  Inde- 
pendent we  approve  not,"  while  their  brethren  in 
England,  then,  and  to  this  time,  call  themselves 
Indejjendents.  It  was  on  account  of  the  extrava- 
gancies of  some,  who  in  most  things  copied  the 
intolerance  of  Brown,  that  Robinson  and  our  New 
England  forefathers  thought  best  to  avoid  the  name. 
Lord  Say,  in  his  speech  in  Parliament,^  says  :  "  The 
bishops  do  know  that  those  to  whom  they  usually 
do  apply  the  term  Separatists  are  Brownists.  The 
Brownists  differ  from  us  in  no  fundamental  point 
of  doctrine  or  saving  truth.  Their  failing  is  this: 
They  hold  that  there  is  no  true  church  in  England, 
no  true  ministry,  no  true  worship,  which  depend 
one  upon  another.  They  distinguish  not  between 
the  purity  of  a  church  and  the  being  of  it."  Welde, 
in  his  reply  to  Rathband,^  shows  that  we  admit 
representative  councils,  and  can  pass  sentence  of 
non-communion,  but  cannot  cast  churches  out  of 
Christendom.  Burton,  in  his  Answer  to  Prynne,** 
says  of  the  word  Independent :  "  We  are  not  so 
ashamed  of  it  as  absolutely  to  disclaim  it,  for  two 
reasons,  —  first,  for  distinction  ;  second,  because  the 
word  Independent  is  to  signify,  that  we  hold  all  par- 
ticular churches  of  Christ  to  be  of  equal  authority, 
and  none  to  have  or  exercise  jurisdiction  over 
another:"  but  he  rejects  the  nicliname,  as  implying 
that  they  denied  "  subjection  to  civil  government,  oi 
good  correspondence  with  sister-churches,  by  way  of 
help."  Burroughs,  in  his  Irenicum,*  shows  that  we 
admit  the  ways  of  reproving  churches  held  by  the 


INDEPENDENCr.  207 

Presbyterians,  till  we  come  to  delivering  them  to 
Satan,  where,  he  says,  "  lies  the  knot  of  the  contro- 
versy." "  They  are  not  independent  as  respects 
eivins:  account  to  the  churches  about  them,  but  of 
being  bound,  on  penalty  of  being  unchurched,  to 
obey  their  decisions."  Bartlett,  in  his  Model,^  denies 
that  it  can  be  shown  of  any  Congregationalists,  in 
Old  England  or  New,  that  they  exclude  the  advice 
of  other  churches,  or  refuse  to  be  accountable  to 
those  who  in  a  fair  and  orderly  way  desire  them. 
The  Propositions  to  Parliament  for  Gathering 
Churches,^  will  give  a  pretty  good  view  of  the 
"desires"  of  those  "commonly  but  falsely  called 
Independents."  "  Falsely  "  doubtless  refers  to  the 
first  definition,  as  given  at  the  commencement  of 
this  article.  —  See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  41 — 43; 
Punchard's  View,  185.  ^ 

»  Chap.  ii.  sect.  o.  ^  In  Han.  ii.  136.  ^  ib.  337—341.  -•  lb. 
403,  404.     ^  Ib.  iii.  110,  111.     «  Ib.  238.     '^  Ib.  247—249. 

INDEPENDENCY  of  churches  to  exercise  govern- 
ment ivithin  themselves. —  Gibbon,  in  his  Decline  and 
Fall,  says  :  ^  Independence  and  equality  formed  the 
basis  of  the  internal  constitution  of  the  primitive 
churches  in  the  Roman  empire.  Goodwin,  in  his 
Church  Government,^  argues  this  independency  from 
the  fact  that  an  isolated  church  has  this  power,  and 
the  establishment  of  neighbor-churches  cannot  insti- 
tute an  entire  and  distinct  and  diverse  sort  of  gov- 
ernment over  that  original  church.  Hooker,  in  his 
Survey,^  asserts  that  each  particular  church  is  com- 
plete and  independent,  for  the  exercise  of  all  acts 


208  INDEPENDENCY. 

and  dispensations  belonging  to  a  church,  without 
reference  to  any  other  congregation.  And  Mitchell* 
says :  "  The  independence  of  the  churches  is  a 
necessary  part  of  their  self-government.  Their 
powers  become  a  nullity,  if  they  resign  themselves 
to  a  superior  jurisdiction.  Our  Saviour  himself 
gives  the  ultimate  power  to  the  church.  Matt,  xviii. 
17,  18.  He  does  not  say,  If  the  offending  member 
neglect  to  hear  the  church,  let  it  be  carried  up  to 
some  higher  tribunal,  but  the  case  is  to  be  termi- 
nated  there."  See  ib.  68 — 70.  —  See  Churches 
subject  to  no  external  jurisdiction. 

» In  Han.  i.  7.     -  Page  134.    »  Part  i.  221.    -*  Guide,  66,  67. 

INDEPENDENCY  endangers  monarchy, — Prynne, 
a  Presbyterian,  in  the  fourth  of  his  Twelve  Consi- 
derable Questions,  asks :  ^  "  Whether  the  grounds 
and  reasons  principally  insisted  on  for  an  indepen- 
dent church  government  be  not  such  as,  if  duly 
examined,  will,  by  necessary,  inevitable  consequence, 
subvert,  dissolve,  or  at  least  embroil  or  endanger,  all 
national  and  provincial  churches,  councils,  and  sy- 
nods, and  all  settled  monarchical,  aristocratical,  or 
oligarchical  government,  in  nations,"  &c.  ?  Here, 
alone.  Burton,  his  Congregationalist  opponent, 
seems  to  be  put  to  the  worse  in  his  argument.  In 
his  reply,^  he  only  seems  to  confirm  Prynne's  awful 
objection,  though  he  labors  hard  to  overthrow  it. 
The  truth  is,  Prynne's  argument  is  unanswerable. 
Lord  Brooke,  in  his  discourse  on  Episcopacy,'  labors 
hard,  and  is  evidently  in  great  trouble,  to  prove  that 
church  liberty  has  not  a  tendency  to  introduce  repub- 


INDEPENDENCY.  209 

lican  civil  government.  Even  Hanbury  "^  says  :  "  It 
cannot  be  proved  that  Independency  leads  necessa- 
rily to  republicanism."  He,  however,  found  himself 
hard  pressed  with  the  fact,  that  the  existence  of  the 
Commonwealth  was  exactly  coeval  with  the  triumph 
of  Independency  in  England.  American  Congre- 
gationalists  will  agree  with  him,  that  it  "cannot  be 
proved,"  because  they  perceive  that  it  is  self-evident, 
Robinson,  in  his  Answer  to  Helwisse,*  found  him- 
self pressed  with  the  same  argument ;  and  Punch- 
ard  remarks,  that  "  it  could  not  but  be  a  difficult 
task  to  show  that  their  church  government  was  not 
popular."  That  Robinson,  with  his  clear  mind,  was 
endeavoring  to  evade  the  argument  against  ecclesi- 
astical democracy,  and  to  make  it  equivalent  to  civil 
monarchy,  may  be  clearly  seen  from  the  continua- 
tion of  his  reasoning.^  Our  forefathers  were  sincere, 
loyal  monarchists,  and  brought  in  the  ruling  elders 
to  make  a  mixed  government.  These,  centaur-like, 
appear  in  their  system  neither  one  thing  nor  another, 
and  went  into  disuse  just  as  fast  as  republican  prin- 
ciples advanced  in  the  colonies.  Rev.  Jonathan 
Mahew^  says  of  himself:  "  And  having  learnt  from 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  that  wise,  brave,  and  virtuous 
men  were  always  friends  to  liberty;  that  God  gave 
the  Israelites  a  king  in  his  anger,  because  they  had 
not  sense  and  virtue  enough  to  like  a  free  common- 
wealth." Eliot,  speaking  of  the  mission  of  Brad- 
street  and  Norton  to  England  in  1662,  says :  ^  "It 
was  well  known  that  they  were  actuated  by  repub- 
lican   sentiments,  and   were    Puritans   of   a   strict 

denomination,  with  no  kind  of  reverence  for  bishops 
18  • 


210  INDEPENDENCY. 

or  noblest     Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,'  com- 
pares Independency  to  democracy  in  civil  govern- 
ment.     He  predicts  that  the  "  elective  course  will 
soon  lead  to  disorder  and  ruin."     He  says  that  he 
and  others  do  know  {!  I)  that  it  is  not  fit  nor  possi- 
ble (/  /)  to  be  continued  long  in  New  England  (/  /  /). 
John  Milton ^°  says:  The  kings  of  this  world  have 
ever  instinctively  hated  the  church  of  God.     Is  it 
because  they  fear  liberty  and  equality,  or  because 
themselves  belong  to  another  kingdom  ?    He  says : " 
"  King  Charles  set  himself  to  the  removal  of  those 
men  whose  doctrine  and  desire  of  church  discipline 
he  feared  would  be  the  undoing  of  his  monarchy." 
Henry  Jacob  ^^  shows  that  his  opponents  thought 
that  popular  church  government  led  to  making  the 
civil  government  conform  to  it. —  See  Punchard's 
View,  240—243. 

*  Page  3.  '  In  Han.  ii.  411.  »  lb.  125.  *  lb.  iii.  379.  '  In 
Punchard's  Hist.  337,  340;  and  Works,  iii.  134—138.  »  lb.  347— 
349.  '  In  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  321.  »  lb.  82.  »  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col. 
series  iii.  vol.  iii.  127.  ^"^  Eikonoklastes,  132.  "  lb.  134.  »«  i^ 
Han.  i.  222. 


Whoever  wishes  to  learn  what  means  were  used 
to  put  down  Independency  in  England  should  con- 
sult Hanbury,  vol.  ii.  218 — 220,  and  vol.  iii.  101,  and 
learn  it  from  the  pens  of  their  opponents,  particularly 
Baillie,  who  invoked  a  Scotch  army,  fifteen  thousand 
strong,  to  give  force  to  Presbyterian  arguments  in 
the  Westminster  Assembly.  He  complains  that 
the  "  Independents  there  plead  for  toleration  for 
others  as  well  as  themselves  " ! ! 


INSTALLATION.  211 

INDIFFERENTS  to  he  decided  by  the  church,  not 
by  rulers.  —  Lord  Brooke  shows/  that,  if  indifferent 
matters  are  to  be  decided  by  church  rulers,  they  will 
soon  decide  all  things  indifferent  to  be  absolutely 
necessary.  It  was  thus  that  they  decreed  the  abso- 
lute necessity  of  the  habits,  ceremonies,  &c.,  and 
enforced  conformity  under  the  most  severe  penalties. 
Bradshaw  says :  ^  "  Those  w^ho  have  power  to  join 
to  the  sacrament  of  baptism  the  sign  of  the  cross, 
have  authority  also,  no  doubt,  to  join  to  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  Supper,  flesh,  broth,  butter,  or  cheese." 

^  In  Han.  ii.  120,  121.    ^  Treatise  on  Divine  "Worship,  10. 

INSTALLATION,  is  it  indispensable  ? -^  CoXton 
Mather  *  says :  "  Ministers  coming  from  England 
were  usually  re-ordained ;  but,  some  of  them  scru- 
pling, the  churches  have  elected  them  and  embraced 
them,  and  so,  solemnizing  the  transaction  with  fast- 
ing and  prayer,  have  enjoyed  them  to  all  evangelical 
intents  and  purposes,  without  their  being  re-ordained 
at  all. 

*  Magnalia,  ii.  209. 

INSTALLATION,  mode  of.  —  Cotton  Mather ' 
says,  a  minister  removing  from  another  church,  "  a 
day  of  prayer  is  kept,  the  choice  renewed,  and  the 
charge  accepted,  in  the  presence  of  delegates  from 
other  churches ;  and  no  further  imposition  of  hands 
is  used  in  his  instalment.  He  says  ^  that  "  installa- 
tions are  conducted  as  ordinations,  except  the  im- 
position of  hands.'*  Cambridge  Platform  *  intimates 
that  imposition  of  hands  should  be  used  in  installa- 


212  JESUS   CHRIST. 

tion,  since  Paul  twice  received  it  from  Ananias. — 
See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  124 ;  Punchard's  View,  166. 
See  Imposition  of  Hands. 

»  Rat,  DIs.  41, 42.     2  it,.  i69,  170.     =*  Chap.  ix.  sect.  7. 

INSTITUTIONS  OF  THE  GOSPEL,  what.--- 
Owen,  in  his  Catechism,^  enumerates  the  principal 
of  these  to  be  —  "calling,  gathering,  and  settling 
churches,  with  their  officers ;  prayer;  singing  psalms ; 
preaching;  sacraments;  and  discipline." 

^  In  Works,  xix.  502. 

INTERMISSIONS,  Sabbath,  hoiu  spent  in  Neio 
England.  —  Cotton  Mather  ^  says :  "  The  more  faith- 
ful and  watchful  pastors  have  been  put  upon  using 
their  contrivances  that  their  employments  may  be 
most  serviceable  to  the  interests  of  holiness.  It  has 
been  proposed,  that  repetitions  of,  or  conferences  on, 
the  word  of  Christ,  may  be  some  of  their  employ- 
ments." Thus  they  were  in  advance  of  Raikes  in 
devising  virtual  Sabbath-schools.  —  See  Sabbath- 
schools. 

^  Rat.  Dis.  A5. 

JESUS  CHRIST  is  the  only  lawgiver  to  his  church. 
This  is  one  of  the  first  principles  of  Congregational- 
ism. It  is  directly  asserted  by  Henry  Jacob,  in  his 
Divine  Beginning  of  Christ's  Visible  Church.^ 
John  Davenport,  in  his  Power  of  Congregational 
Churches,^  says :  "  The  absolute  supremacj^  of  power 
is  in  Christ.  That  which  the  Church  hath  is  only 
delegated  from  Christ."  —  See  Legislation. 
» In  Han.  i.  228.    *  lb.  ii.  64. 


KEYS.  213 

JURISDICTION  of  churches  in  the  people.  —  John 
Wise,  in  his  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Espoused,^ 
says:  "Our  New  England  government  grants  a 
juridical  power  to  the  fraternity,  and  makes  them 
the  proper  judges  in  all  ecclesiastical  cases  and 
administrations."  The  Answer  of  the  Boston  Synod 
of  1662  says  :  ^  "  Every  church  .  .  .  hath  received 
from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  full  power  and  authority 
ecclesiastical,  within  itself,  regularly  to  administer 
all  the  ordinances  of  Christ,  and  is  not  under  any 
other  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  whatever." — See 
Churches  subject  to  no  external  jurisdiction;  Con- 
sociations; Councils;  Independency  q/"  c/tzirc/ze^; 
Synods  ;  Keys  ;  Power,  church;  and  the  like  topics. 

»  Page  108.     2  Pages  113,  114. 

KEYS,  poiver  of,  what.  —  Hooker  says :  *  "  By 
power  of  the  keys  we  understand  the  power  of  ordi- 
nation, excommunication,  &c."  He  shows  ^  that 
even  Rutherford  admitted  that  an  isolated  church 
had  the  power  of  excommunication  in  itself.  John 
Cotton  says : '  "  The  keys  of  the  kingdom  are  the 
ordinances  which  Christ  hath  instituted  to  be  admin- 
istered in  his  church." 

*  Survey,  part  i.  231.  2  ib.  240.  »  Keys  of  Heaven,  20. 

KEYS  granted  only  to  embodied  churches.  — Good- 
win ^  says :  "  The  jus  executionis,  Matt,  xviii.  16, 
Christ  doth  not  give  it  to  the  saints  and  officers 
simply,  but  as  formed  up  into  bodies.  Matt.  xvi. 
holdeth  that  they  are  to  be  saints  making  confession, 
as  Peter  did;  but  Matt,  xviii.  holdeth  forth  how  that 


214  KEYS. 

these  saints  be  formed  up  into  several  bodies  oi 
churches,  and  so  to  execute  this  power."  The  whole 
of  the  fourth  chapter  of  his  second  book  is  on  this 
point.  Davenport,  in  his  Power  oT  Congregational 
Churches,*  shows  that  this  doctrine  follows  from  the 
fact  that  all  they  do  as  embodied  churches  proceeds 
from  this  power.  Hooker^  shows  that  "a  church 
congregational  is  the  first  power  of  the  keys."  He 
says,  however,  that  it  was  the  question  of  that  day, 
"  whether  all  ecclesiastical  power  be  impaled,  im- 
propriated, and  rightly  taken  into  the  presbytery 
(i.e.  the  bench  of  elders  in  a  church)  alone ;  causing 
great  thoughts  concerning  presbytery,  how  shall  they 
retain  their  power?  and  the  people,  how  shall  they 
retain  their  rights  ?  "  (See  Elders.)  Owen,  in  his 
Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  iii.'*  says:  "The 
keys  were  originally  given  to  the  whole  church,  in 
distinction  from  the  officers  of  it."  John  Cotton^ 
says :  The  power  of  the  keys  is  a  liberty  purchased 
to  the  church  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  should 
not  be  parted  with  at  a  less  price. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  55.  '^  In  Han.  ii.  63,  64.  »  Prgf.  to  Survey.  -» In 
"Works,  XX.  389.     ^  Way  of  the  Churches,  50. 

KEYS,  power  of^  claimed  for  particular  churches 
with  elders.  —  This  was  strenuously  maintained  by 
Goodwin.^  The  presence  of  elders  with  the  church 
was  held  to  be  necessary,  because  the  power  to  re- 
ceive, excommunicate,  &c.,  was  supposed  to  be  with 
them,  while  they  might  not  do  it  without  the  "  free 
consent  of  the  brotherhood."^  Cotton, in  his  Key s,^ 
argues  this  same  point,  placing  the  key  of  power  in 


^ 


KINGSHIP   OP  CHRIST.  215 

the  brethren,  and  *  the  key  of  authority  in  the  elders. 
Thus,  here,  as  everywhere  else,  we  find  a  guarding 
against  democracy,  by  placing  the  executive  power 
wholly  in  the  elders.  So  Cambridge  Platform* 
places  the  power  of  office  in  the  elders,  and  the 
power  of  privilege  in  the  brotherhood  (see  chapters 
V.  and  X.) ;  making  the  elders  subject,  however,  to 
the  power  of  the  church  "  in  case  of  mal-adminis- 
tration."  Eaton  and  Taylor  maintain^  that  the 
power  of  government  is  distinctly  given  to  the 
church :  "  Tell  it  to  the  church."  Also  the  power 
of  excommunication  was  in  the  church,  and  not  even 
in  the  apostle.  So,  too,  argues  Isaac  Chauncy,  in 
his  Divine  Institution  of  Congregational  Churches.^ 
He  shows  conclusively  that  the  keys  were  given  to 
the  church  through  Peter,  as  it  is  usual  to  name  one 
or  more  individuals  in  all  charters.  —  See  Elders, 
is  one  or  more  necessary  to  church  action  ? 

*  Ch.  Gov.  Ill — 116.  ^  See  Bradshaw's  Eng.  Puritanism,  in 
Neal,  i.  249.  ^  pages  36—48.  ^  ib.  49—54.  »  Pages  28,  41. 
«  Defence,  85,  95.     '  Pages  102—104. 

KINGSHIP  OF  QBRl^T  immediate.^ Goodwm' 
shows  that  this  should  be  maintained,  "not  merely 
as  our  liberty,  but  as  Christ's  prerogative,  which  we, 
as  his  courtiers,  are  not  to  see  encroached  upon  or 
diminished."  Consequently,  he  holds  that  none 
have  a  right  to  direct  us  contrary  to  God's  com- 
mands, nor  have  we  a  right  to  obey  such  wicked 
directions.  —  See  Jesus  Christ  is  the  only  lawgiver 
to  his  church, 

*  Ch.  Gov.  258. 


216  KNEELING. 

KNEELING,  lohy  not  practised  at  communion.  — 
Robinson,  in  his  Answer  to  Hall,*  asks :  "  Where 
learned  you  your  devout  kneeling  to  or  before  the 
bread,  but  from  that  error  of  transubstantiation?" 
Neal  ^  represents  the  Puritans  as  excepting  against 
the  injunction  of  kneeling  at  the  sacrament  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  as  not  agreeable  to  the  example  of 
Christ,  having  no  foundation  in  antiquity,  and  having 
been  grossly  abused  to  idolatry.  He  represents 
them '  as  declaring  that  it  arose  from  the  notion  of 
the  transubstantiation  of  the  elements;  —  that  the 
Papists  admit  they  would  be  guilty  of  idolatry  in 
kneeling  before  them,  if  they  did  not  really  believe 
them  to  be  the  real  body  and  blood  of  Christ ;  and 
that  it  is  a  gross  hypocrisy  for  us  to  pretend  more 
holiness,  reverence,  and  devotion  in  receiving  the 
sacrament  than  the  apostles,  who  received  it  from 
the  immediate  hand  and  person  of  Christ  himself. 
Lord  King,  in  his  Inquiry,^  shows  from  the  fathers, 
that,  in  whatever  other  position  it  was  received  in 
the  ancient  churches,  it  could  not  have  been  kneeling. 
Cartv^ight,  in  his  Answer  to  Whitgift,^  shows  that 
tliere  is  the  same  dangerous  tendency  to  idolatry 
in  kneeling  at  the  sacrament  as  in  receiving  the 
wafer-cake.  • 

Bradshaw,  in  his  Treatise  on  Worship  and  Cere- 
monies,*' advocates  the  same  sentiments,  showing 
that,  if  it  is  in  reverence  to  God,  it  is  will-worship, 
1.6.  not  required ;  and,  if  in  reverence  to  the  bread, 
it  is  idolatry.  In  the  Dispute  concerning  Kneeling 
at  the  Sacraments,  published  in  1608,  it  is  asserted,^ 
that  '*  kneeling  in  reverence  to  the  bread  and  wine 


LAWS.  217 

would  have  justified  the  angel  and  Peter  in  receiv- 
ing homage  out  of  reverence." 

'  In  Punchard's  Hist.  379 ;  and  Han.  i.  194;  and  Works,  iii.  411. 
2  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  107.  =^  lb.  246,  247.  -*  Part  ii.  113.  ^  Page 
165.     ^  Pages  90—105.     '  Page  162. 

LAWS,  New  Ihig-land,  concerning'  religion,  — 
Lambert,  in  his  History  of  the  Colony  of  New 
Haven,  says^  the  Plantation  Covenant  was  for  more 
than  a  year  their  only  civil  and  religious  compact; 
in  this  they  agreed  "  to  be  ordered  by  the  rules 
which  the  Scriptures  hold  forth."  Eliot,  in  his 
Ecclesiastical  History  of  Massachusetts,^  asserts, 
that,  soon  after  1651,  it  was  ordered  by  General 
Court,  that  no  minister  should  be  called  into  office 
without  the  approbation  and  allowance  of  some  of 
the  magistrates,  as  well  as  some  of  the  neighbor- 
churches.  In  a  petition  of  the  Church  and  Town 
of  Woburn  in  1553,'  the  petitioners  complain  of  a 
late  order  of  court,  "that  those  who  preach  con- 
stantly be  approbated,  either  by  a  council  of  neigh- 
bor-churches, or  by  the  county  court."  (See  further, 
under  Approbation  to  preach.)  In  1695  it  was 
enacted,  that,  when  a  parish  do  not  concur  with  a 
church  in  the  choice  of  a  pastor,  the  church  may 
call  a  council ;  and,  if  they  approve,  he  shall  be  the 
minister  of  the  parish.  This  was  argued  in  point 
in  the  Springfield  case.  (See  Answer  to  Hampshire 
Narrative,  37.)  In  the  Answer  of  the  General  Court 
to  Dr.  Child  and  others,  in  1769,^  they  assert  that, 
according  to  the  fundamentals  of  Massachusetts, 
"all  persons,  orthodox  in  judgment  and  not  scan- 
19 


218  LEGISLATION. 

dalous  in  life,  may  gather  into  a  church  state. 
Zabdiel  Adams,  in  his  Answer  to  a  Treatise  on 
Church  Government,  admits  that  a  parish  may  refuse 
the  result  of  a  council  negativing  their  dismission 
of  a  minister;  but,  in  that  case,  they  must  pay  his 
salary -according  to  contract.  These  are  a  few  of 
the  things  that  were  of  old  in  New  England  religious 
laws. —  See  Acts  and  Laws  of  his  Majesty's  Pro- 
vince in  Massachusetts  Bay,  published  in  1742, 
pages  14,  15,  17,  18,  27,  36,  41,  68,  70,  81,  94,  153, 
154,  155, 156,  211,  213,  215,  216,  231,  264,  265,  266, 
267,  324,  831,  332. 

*  Page  44r.  ^  In  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  x.  25.  ^  lb. 
series  iii.  vol.  i.  35 — 42.    ■*  Hutchinson's  Mass.  Col.  of  Papers,  201. 

Dr.  Perry's  forthcoming  work  will  doubtless  con- 
tain much  valuable  information  concerning  present 
New  England  ecclesiastical  laws. 

LEGISLATION  not  the  jirerogative  of  churches. 
Punchard,  in  his  History,^  shows  that  this  was  a 
fundamental  doctrine  of  some  of  the  purest  early 
dissenting  churches,  —  as  the  Paterines,  who  say, 
"  a  church  has  no  power  to  frame  any  constitu- 
tions ; "  and  the  Albigenses  and  Waldenses,  who 
declare  "that  Christ  has  given  his  church  no  autho- 
rity to  make  laws  for  the  government  of  his  people." 
Neal,^  in  Reply  to  Hooker  ("the  judicious"),  says: 
"  As  far  as  any  church  is  governed  by  the  laws  and 
precepts  of  the  New  Testament,  so  far  it  is  the 
church  of  Christ ;  but  when  it  sets  up  its  own  by- 
laws as  terms  of  commuion,  or  works  the  policy  of 
the  civil  magistrate  into  its  constitution,  so  far  it  is 


LEGISLATION.  219 

a  creature  of  the  state."  Cotton  says : '  "  All  legis- 
lative power  in  the  church  is  in  Christ,  and  not 
from  him  derived  to  any  other;  James  iv.  12;  Isa. 
xxxiii.  22.  He  only  can  create  and  ordain  a  true 
constitution  of  a  church  estate."  Samuel  Mather 
says :  "*  "  I  may  not  fear  to  assert  that  a  great  part 
of  those  disorders  which  have  arisen  in  the  Chris- 
tian world  have  been  by  usurping  legislative  power 
over  the  churches."  Owen,  in  his  Original  of 
Churches,  chap,  ii.^  asserts  that  no  legislative  eccle- 
siastical power  is  left  to  men,  and  that  assuming 
such  power  ;s  dangerous.  Watts,  in  his  Founda- 
tion of  a  Christian  Church,^  maintains  that  churches 
may  not  appoint  any  new  rules  of  admission. 
Welde,  in  his  Answer  to  Rathband,^  shows  it  to 
be  a  principle  of  the  New  England  churches,  "that 
the  church  has  no  power  to  make  laws,  but  only 
to  observe  those  laws  which  Christ  has  given  and 
commanded."  He,  however,  shows,  against  the 
cavils  of  his  opponent,  that  they  have  a  power  to 
determine  needful  things  for  themselves,  but  not 
to  legislate.  Mitchell^  says,  some  think  that  it  is 
expedient  to  have  written  rules  of  discipline  and 
practice ;  but  care  should  be  taken,  in  forming  them, 
that  they  be  not  of  a  legislative  character,  but  only 
declarative.  Congregationalism  as  Contained  in 
the  Scriptures,  &c.,^  says:  "This  description  of  a 
church  (in  the  Platform)  excludes  from  it  every 
thing  of  the  nature  of  legislation."  —  See  Creeds. 

1  Pages  102,  109.  ^  Puritans,  i.  207.  ^  Keys,  65.  *  Apology, 
29.  <*  Works,  xx.  92.  «  Works,  iii.  235.  '  In  Han.  ii.  321. 
8  Guide,  139.     »  Page  6. 


220  LICENSE. , 

LETTER  OF  DISMISSION  ;  has  every  member, 
not  under  discipline^  a  right  to  one  ?  —  See  Affinity  ; 
Dismission. 

The  principles  laid  down  in  these  articles  indicate 
that  he  has  a  right  to  a  dismission,  if  not  disciplina- 
ble') but  not  to  avoid  merited  discipline.  Nor  has 
he  a  right  to  any  other  recommendation  than  the 
church  can  conscientiously  give  him,  based  on  all 
the  facts  in  the  case,  whereupon  the  church  applied 
to  are  to  exercise  their  discretion  as  to  receiving 
him.  But,  unless  the  church  proceed  immediately 
to  discipline,  he  has  a  right  to  dismission  without 
unnecessary  delay. 

LIBERTY  of  conscience  to  be  allowed.  —  Thomas 
Goodwin  ^  expatiates  largely  on  this  point,  assert- 
ing "  that  saints,  or  persons  professing  Christ, 
though  they  differ,  yet,  being  in  Christ,  they  ought 
not  to  judge  or  despise,  but  forbear  one  another;" 
enforcing  his  arguments  by  the  commands  to  bear 
the  infirmities  of  the  weak,  love  one  another,  &c. 
He  takes  an  appeal  from  the  law  of  persecution 
to  the  law  of  God,  and  sues  out  execution  for  the 
day  of  judgment. —  See  Conscience,  Toleration, 
Fellowship,  Creeds,  Uniformity,  Union. 

^  Ch.  Gov.  399—408. 

LICENSE  to  preach.  —  Formerly,  individual  pas- 
tors introduced  whom  they  thought  proper  into 
their  pulpits,  and  churches  made  long  trial  of  the 
gifts  and  fitness  of  candidates  for  the  pastoral  office. 
In  1705,  an  unsuccessful  effort  was  made  to  have 


LICENSE.  221 

none  thus  employed  as  candidates,  who  are  not 
"recommended  by  a  testimonial  under  the  hands 
of  some  association."^  Wise  ^  strenuously  main- 
tains that  this  would  be  an  infringement  on  the 
rights  of  the  churches.  Cotton  Mather^  regards 
the  want  of  a  formal  licensing  power  as  a  defect, 
and  quotes  his  Proposals,  published  twenty  years 
before,  but  says :  "  They  are  not  to  this  day  (1726) 
fully  executed."  From  the  Records  of  Boston  As- 
sociation, it  appears  that  the  late  Dr.  Gray  of  Rox- 
bury  was  the  first  approbated  by  that  body,  in 
1792 ;  and  that  it  was  matter  of  long  deliberation 
whether  they  should  proceed  to  give  such  approba- 
tion according  to  the  vote  of  the  Convention  of 
1790.  March  15,  1804,  that  association  appointed 
a  committee  "to  prepare  rules  to  be  observed  by 
association  in  future,  with  respect  to  the  examina- 
tion and  approbation  of  candidates  for  the  ministry." 
The  subsequent  reports  of  this  committee,  and  the 
doings  of  the  association  thereon,  reveal  to  the  prac- 
tised eye  much  of  the  workings  of  "  the  hand  of 
Joab,"  on  the  question  whether  association  should 
grant  license^  or  merely  approbation.  It  was  decided 
that  "the  moderator  shall  put  (to  the  association) 
this  question,  —  Do  you  approbate?"  and  that  the 
"  credential"  shall  be  of  the  following  "tenor:  .  .  . 
We  approve  as  qualified  for  the  work  of  the  gospel- 
ministry  .  .  . ;  we  accordingly  recommend  him  to  the 
acceptance  and  employment  of  the  churches." 

A  highly  esteemed  correspondent,  who  has  de- 
voted much  labor,  and  brought  uncommon  resources 
of  learning,  to  the  investigation  of  the  usages  of 

19* 


222  LICENSE. 

the  churches,  writes  substantially  thus  :  According 
to  a  fundamental  principle  of  Congregationalism 
and  long-established  usage  in  New  England,  license 
to  preach  is  the  express  or  implied  authority  granted 
by  a  church  to  preach  to  them  the  gospel.  They 
refused  submission  to  or  acknowledgment  of  any 
assumed  authority  as  a  pre-requisite  to  the  office 
of  preaching  the  gospel  in  any  church.  Yet  they 
prudently  availed  themselves  of  such  information 
from  good  and  discerning  men,  and  especially  settled 
ministers,  as  might  aid  them  in  coming  to  a  wise 
decision  in  licensing  to  preach  to  them  on  any  oc- 
casion of  need  or  convenience.  Such  letters  of 
credit  or  approbation^^  coming  at  first  from  one  or 
more  ministers  in  their  individual  capacity,  in  pro- 
cess of  time  came  from  ministers  convened  in  asso- 
ciations, whose  approval  was  thus  expressed,  rather 
for  convenience  than  from  a  designed  assumption 
of  power  to  themselves,  or  a  denial  of  it  to  the 
churches.  The  import  of  such  approbation  was 
not  understood,  either  by  associations  or  churches, 
as  conferring  a  power  or  a  right  to  preach,  or  in 
any  manner  qualifying  the  individual  whom  they 
thus  approved  for  the  office  of  a  public  teacher. 
No  association  has  formally  claimed  the  right  to 
license.  None  could  vindicate  such  a  claim  by 
any  authority.  The  term  license  now  extensively 
current,  as  if  signifying  a  grant  by  associational 
authority  to  preach,  is  unknown  to  the  records  of 
the  older  associations,  except  as  a  recent  usurper, 
or,  as  in  the  Boston  Association  (the  oldest  in  the 
country),  under  virtual  condemnation.     The  Men- 


LITURGY.  223 

don  Association,  which  has  just  completed  its  first 
century,  is  yet  a  stranger  to  giving  license  to  preach, 
and  scrupulously  refrains  from  the  use  of  language 
importing  an  authority  which  belongs  exclusively 
to  churches.  Still  more  recently  has  sprung  up  the 
practice  of  licensing  for  a  limited  term ;  a  practice 
for  which  there  is  no  authority,  unless  the  term 
license  is  used,  as  it  is  in  some  associations,  to 
signify  a  mere  recommendation,  which  the  receiver 
is  not  allowed  to  use  after  the  expiration  of  the 
limited  time. —  Mitchell^  and  the  Congregational 
Manual^  now  claim  licensing  as  the  right  of  mini- 
sters in  their  associated  capacity ;  but  the  practice 
is  of  recent  origin. —  See  Approbation  to  preach; 
Preach,  who  may  ?  Prophesying. 

*  "Wise's  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Espoused,  120.     'lb.  121 — 
128.     3  Rat.  Dis.  117,  121.    -»  Guide,  232.     *  Page  29. 

LIMITS  of  churches.  —  Goodwin  ^  limits  them  to 
so  many  as  can  meet  in  one  place,  because  "  the 
same  assembly  is  to  meet  for  discipline  that  meets 
for  worship ;  because  of  the  time  that  is  instituted 
for  their  worship,  viz.  the  Lord's  day,  and  because 
of  the  duties  of  the  elders  to  preach  and  rule ; " 
with  several  other  considerations.  This  is  the  ' 
universal  sentiment  of  Congregationalists. —  See 
Church,  wa?/  one  have  branches  ?  Churches  distinct 
bodies, 

iCh.Gov.  67. 

LITURGY.— Cotton  Mather^  shows  that  "the 
New  England  churches  have  no  liturgy  composed 


224  lord's  supper. 

for  them,  much  less  imposed  upon  them.  .  .  .  Our 
Saviour  and  his  apostles  never  provided  any  prayer- 
book  but  the  Bible  for  us.  .  .  .  The  first  planters 
hoped  that  the  second  coming  of  our  Saviour  will 
arrive  before  there  will  be  received  among  them  any 
liber  officialis  (book  of  authority)  but  the  Sacred 
Scriptures."  He  shows  that  liturgies  w^ere  invented 
when  the  bishops,  assembled  in  councils,  were  many 
of  them  so  illiterate  that  they  must  get  another  to 
subscribe  their  names  for  them, 

*  Rat.  Dis.  46—52. 

LORD'S  PRAYER:  we  are  not  tied  to  the  form, 
but  only  to  the  spirit  of  it. — Greenwood,  in  his  Answer 
to  GifFard,^  says :  "  Christ  did  not  say.  Say  these 
words  by  rote,  but  after  this  manner  therefore  pray 
ye."  The  adverb  is  one  of  similitude :  Christ 
teaches  to  ask  for  the  object  of  individual  wants,  as 
a  child  asks  bread  of  a  father.  This  was  a  matter 
of  long  dispute  between  the  Nonconformists  and 
the  Episcopalians ;  the  former  maintaining  that 
there  was  no  necessity  of  having  the  words  eveq  of 
the  Lord's  Prayer  imposed  on  men.  Increase 
Mather,  in  his  Order  of  the  Churches  of  New  Eng- 
land Justified,^  shows  that  it  is  lawful,  but  not  re- 
quired, to  use  the  words  of  the  Lord's  Prayer. 

» In  Han.  i.  68,  69.     ^  Pages  117—136. 

LORD'S  SUPPER,  a  church  ordinance. —  Good- 
win ^  argues  this  point  at  length,  endeavoring  to 
prove  it  by  necessary  inference  from  other  Congre- 
gational  principles,  and   by  the  .Holy   Scriptures. 


lord's  supper.  225 

He  maintained  that  it  must  be  in  a  congregated 
church,  and  by  a  preaching  elder  (see  further  on  Must 
it  be  administered  by  an  ordained  minister?) ;  —  that 
the  recipient  must  be  a  member  of  some  organized 
church ;  and  that  a  number  of  congregated  church 
members,  not  with  a  church,  have  no  right  to  this 
ordinance. 

1  Ch.  Gov.  350—356. 

LORD'S  SUPPER,  should  it  be  administered  to 
any  who  are  not  member's  of  churches  ?  —  The  Answer 
of  the  New  England  Elders  to  the  Nine  Positions,^ 
shows  that  the  means  of  judging  of  piety  are  want- 
ing, unless  the  communicants  join  themselves  to 
some  church.  Goodwin "  says :  "  One  apostle  and 
one  other  man  could  not  receive  the  Lord's  Supper 
together,  because  they  could  not  make  a  church, 
1  Cor.  X.  Allin  and  Shepard,  in  their  Answer  to 
Ball,^  agree  that  there  are  privileges  which  belong 
to  a  believer  as  such,  but  not  instituted  privileges. 
These  only  are  rightly  to  be  obtained  in  the  way  of 
the  institution.  Dr.  Watts,  in  his  Terms  of  Com- 
munion, Quest,  vi.,^  maintains  that  those  not  mem- 
bers of  churches  ordinarily  ought  not  to  come  to 
the  communion,  but  that  there  are  exceptions.  A 
church  may  refuse  to  receive  a  troublesome  Chris- 
tian (?)  to  membership,  and  yet  admit  him  to  com- 
munion!! By  further  reference  to  the  Answer  of 
the  New  England  Elders  to  the  Nine  Positions,  as 
quoted  in  Hanbury,*  we  find  them  declaring; 
"  Church  communion  we  hold  only  with  church 
members,  admitting  to  the  fellowship  of  the  seals 


226  lord's  supper. 

known  and  approved  and  orderly  recommended 
members  of  any  true  church."  This  they  maintain 
by  seven  considerations,  among  which  is  this  :  They 
that  arc  incapable  of  the  censures  are  incapable  of 
the  privileges.  Those  not  in  covenant  are  incapa- 
ble of  the  censures,  therefore  of  the  seals  as  privi- 
leges. 

»  Page  70.  '  Ch.  Gov.  233.  '  In  Han.  iii.  40.  *  Works,  iii. 
256.     »  Vol.  ii.  27. 

LORD'S  SUPPER  not  for  the  known  wicked,— 
Johnson,  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Reformed  Churches,^ 
quotes  from  Chrysostom :  "  No  small  punishment 
hangeth  over  you,  if,  knowing  a  man  to  be  wicked, 
ye  suffer  him  to  be  a  partaker  at  this  table :  his 
blood  shall  be  required  at  your  hands."  One  of  the 
Queries  to  the  Church  of  Scotland  ~  is  this  :  "  If  he 
that  eateth  and  drinketh  unworthily,  eateth  and 
drinketh  his  own  judgment;  and  all  English  souls 
are  bound  to  eat  and  drink  ...  at  sixteen,  who  sees 
not  .  .  .  that  the  body  of  the  people  are  compelled 
by  law  to  eat  and  drink,  at  sixteen,  their  own  judg- 
ment ?  "  Cotton  Mather '  argues  that  they  should 
not  be  admitted  who  do  not  give  evidence  of  se- 
rious piety,  upon  which  "  all  turns."  Upon  this 
point  there  was,  however,  much  doubt  and  diver- 
sity in  his  day.  They,  however,  agreed  that  the 
weakest  Christian,  if  sincere,  should  not  be  dis- 
carded. The  half-way  covenant  doctrine  led  con- 
sistently to  the  admission  of  the  unregenerate.  to 
the  communion. 

»  In  Han,  i.  316.    »  lb.  ii.  247.     =«  Rat.  Dis.  82— 84. 


lord's  supper.  '2'21 

LORD'S  SUPPER  should  not  be  privately  admini- 
stered. —  Sparke  and  Travers,  in  their  conference 
with  the  Bishop  of  Winchester,^  objected  to  private 
communion.  Cotton  Mather^  says:  "It  being  a 
main  scope  of  the  Lord's  Supper  to  be  a  seal  of 
that  mystery,  the  communion  of  saints  (?),  the 
churches  of  New  England  judge  it  not  so  proper 
for  one  or  two,  by  a  bedside  or  the  like,  to  celebrate 
this  ordinance." 

'  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  167.     =  Rat.  Dis.  102. 

LORD'S  SUPPER,  should  it  be  administered  by 
any  but  ordained  ministers  ?  —  The  Savoy  Confes- 
sion ^  says  :  "  No  persons  may  administer  the  sacra- 
ment but  such  as  are  ordained  thereto."  And  this 
is  agreeable  to  present,  and,. so  far  as  I  can  learn, 
past  practice  of  Congregationalists.  How  much  of 
the  principle  of  apostolical  succession  and  holy 
unction  is  countenanced  by  this  practice,  may  be  a 
question.  Samuel  Mather^,  quotes  Fabritius,  with 
apparent  g,pprobation :  "If  any  man,  even  a  laic, 
be  appointed  by  the  church  to  administer  the  sacra- 
ment, if  he  does  it,  he  does  nothing  but  his  duty, 
and  neither  offends  against  the  faith  nor  against 
good  order."  Andrew  Fuller,  in  his  Address  to  a 
Young  Minister,^  says :  "  Ordination  seems  origi- 
nally intended  for  guarding  against  bad.  characters. 
I  have  therefore  been  much  concerned  to  see  the 
practice  of  administering^  the  Lord's  Supper  obtain 
prior  to  it,  which  tends  to  set  it  aside,  and  will,  I  am 
persuaded,  be  the  source  of  many  mishaps  in  the 
churches."     Yet  on  the  same  page,  in  his  Reply  to 


228  lord's  supper. 

a  Baptist  Church  in  Edinburgh,  he  says :  "  I  had 
long  been  of  the  opinion  that  there  was  no  Scrip- 
ture for  confining  the  administration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  to  a  minister.  ...  I  could  wish  that  every 
church,  when  destitute  of  a  pastor,  would  attend 
to  the  Lord's  Supper  among  themselves."  —  See 
Seals'  ;  Ministers,  may  they  administer  seals,  SfC.  ? 

'  In  Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  179.     ^  Apology,  61.     ^  Works,  ii.  662. 

LORD'S  SUPPER,  is  baptism  an  indispensable 
pre-requisite  to  ?  —  Andrew  Fuller,  in  his  Letter  to 
Ward,^  argues  the  affirmative  from  Christ's  require- 
ment of  baptism.  Robert  Hall,  in  his  Terms  of 
Communion,  everywhere  maintains  the  negative. 

»  Works,  ii.  667,  668. 

LORD'S  SUPPER,  should  the  bread  and  luine  in 
it  be  consecrated? — Nathaniel  Mather,  in  his  Dis- 
cussion on  a  Pastor's  Officiating  in  Other  Churches,^ 
says :  "  No  man  should  bless  and  separate  the  ele- 
ments, so  as  to  make  them  sacramentjil,  without 
power  from  Christ,  whose  work  alone  it  is,  by  his 
poor  minister,  to  effect  that  special  union,  which 
there  truly  is  in  the  sacrament,  between  the  elements 
and  Christ's  body  and  blood."  Upham  ^  speaks  of 
the  consecration  of  the  sacramental  elements  in 
prayer,  and  no  wonder,  in  these  days  of  consecra- 
tion of  burial-grounds,  and  dedication  of  meeting- 
houses ;  but  the  quotation  from  Nathaniel  Mather 
above  smells  strangely  of  Rome  for  a  Congrega 
tional  writer  of  those  times.  This  does  not  seem 
to   have  been   a   subject  much   discussed  by  the 


lord's  supper.  229 

fathers;  but  their  sentiments  on  parallel  doctrines 
may  be  seen  under  the  heads  Ceremonies,  Habits, 
Idolatry,  Kneeling.  One  of  the  Genevan  Dis- 
putants (Peter  Carpenter,  "a  low  countrieman ") 
says^  of  the  consecration  of  the  emblems  of  the 
Lord's  Supper :  "  They  are  to  be  condemned  who 
attribute  some  holiness  to  the  signs;  and,  as  for 
those  who  worship  them,  these  we  utterly  detest  as 
open  idolaters." 

»  Page  19.    2  Bat.  Dis.  235.    ^  Page  164. 

LORD'S  SUPPER,  hoiv  often  should  it  he  admi- 
nistered..—  Goodwin  devotes  the  fifth  chapter  of  his 
seventh  book  on  Church  Government  to  prove  that 
it  should  be  administered  every  Lord's  day.  His 
arguments  are  powerful  and  ingenious,  if  not  con- 
clusive. He  demands  a  warrant  *  for  singling  out 
special  days  for  this  purpose  of  attending  to  a  divine 
institution.  Cotton  Mather  ^  says  :  "  The  time  for 
celebrating  this  ordinance  in  New  England  is  vari- 
ous, and  the  pastors  reserve  the  liberty  of  altering 
the  times  as  they  judge  fit,  upon  emergencies." 
Hopkins  °  says  :  It  does  not  follow  from  Acts  xx.  7, 
that  the  disciples  always  came  together  on  the  first 
day  of  the  week  to  break  bread.  —  See  Upham's 
Rat.  Dis.  236,  237. 

»  Page  342.    =  Rat.  Dis.  95.    '  System,  ii.  347. 

LORD'S  SUPPER,  we  should  not  neglect,  for 
wrong  in  others.  —  This  is  so  plain  a  principle  of 
Scripture  that  it  seems  strange  that  it  should  ever 
have  been  lost  sight  of;  yet  multitudes  seem  to 

20 


230  LOT. 

feel  that  they  are  excused  from  obeying  Christ 
when  they  are  angry  with  their  brethren.  Cam- 
bridge Platform  ^  shows  that  no  member  should 
punish  himself  on  account  of  wrong  in  any  of  his 
brethren.  If  discipline  is  neglected,  and  the  church 
cannot  be  reformed,  they  may  use  their  liberty  to 
withdraw  and  go  to  other  churches,  when  they  can- 
not remain  without  continuing  in  sin,  according  to 
chapter  xiii.  section  4.  MitchelP  shows  that  such 
a  forsaking  the  communion  is  a  disciplinable  of- 
fence. Cotton  Mather^  quotes  Cambridge  Asso- 
ciation, who  assert  that  it  is  schism  and  scandal 
to  withdraw  on  account  of  wrong  in  others,  and 
should  be  dealt  with  as  unruly  and  walking  disor- 
derly. In  Winthrop's  Journal  ^  is  recorded  an  in- 
stance of  the  church  in  Watertown  dealing  with, 
and  excluding  a  member  for  thus  absenting  himself, 
in  1632.— 'See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  143,  144,  237, 
238 ;  also  Isaac  Chauncy's  remarks  under  article 
Suspension. 

»  Chap.  xiv.  sect.  ix.  ^  Guide,  112—115.  ^  Magnalia,  ii.  221. 
*  Vol.  i.  81. 

LOT,  when  we  may  lawfully  decide  hy  it,  —  Fox- 
croft,  in  his  Discourse  preparatory  to  the  choice  of 
a  minister,^  recommends  the  lot  where  two  or  more 
candidates  divide  a  people  relative  to  the  choice  of 
a  pastor,  "  that  the  Lord  may  show  which  he  has 
chosen."  Cotton,  in  his  Letter  to  Leavitt,'' says: 
"  Carding  and  choosing  valentines  are  an  appeal  to 
the  lot,  in  wdiich  God  is  the  Disposer."  And  to 
appeal  to  him  and  his  immediate  providence  for 


MAGISTRATES.  231 

the  dispensing  these  ludicra  seemeth  to  me  a  taking 
of  his  name  in  vain. 

^  Pasres  24—47.     ^  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  ser.  ii.  vol.  x.  183. 


,0* 

'a 


r 


MAGISTRATES,  may  they  make  laivs  establishing 
religion  ?  —  Burton,  in  his  Answer  to  Prynne's 
Twelve  New  Interrogatories,^  says :  "  Those  patri- 
archs and  princes  of  Israel,  before  the  law  and 
under  the  law,  from  Adam  to  Christ,  never  had  this 
power  or  prerogative  to  make  ecclesiastical  laws  or 
binding  canons."  He  further  presses  the  point,^ 
that  neither  synods  nor  parliaments  have  this  power. 
Magistrates  are  to  punish  for  overt  acts,  not  for 
opinions.  Baillie,  in  his  Dissuasive,^  vehemently 
accuses  the  Independents  of  esteeming  all  matters 
of  religion  free  and  exempt  from  the  magistrate's 
sword  and  power.  Edwards,  in  his  Gangrsense,'* 
represents  the  Independents  of  the  army  as  un- 
willing that  the  Parliament  should  set  up  even 
Independent  government:  they  held  liberty  of  con- 
science ;  that  in  matters  of  religion  no  man  should 
be  bound,  but  every  one  left  to  follow  his  own 
conscience.  Cambridge  Platform  ^  encroaches  on 
this  broad  ground :  though  it  maintains  the  general 
principle,  yet  it  makes  a  fatal  exception,  by  allow- 
ing magistrates  to  punish,  where  the  matter  is  per- 
fectly clear,  for  heresy  and  venting  corrupt  opinions 
that  destroy  the  foundation.  It  does  not  here  dis- 
tinguish between  disturbing  the  peace  and  venting 
what  the  judges  say  it  is  clear  are  pernicious  opi- 
nions. Bastwick,  in  his  Treatise  on  Church  Go- 
vernment,^  accuses   the    Independents  of   holding 


232  »  MAGISTRATES. 

that  the  magistrate  might  not  inflict  corporal  pun- 
ishment for  matters  of  religion.  It  seems  that  the 
loss  of  his  own  ears  had  not  brought  him  to  his 
senses.  Possibly,  as  his  own  party  came  into 
power,  he  remembered  the  maxim,  "  An  eye  for 
an  eye,  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth ; "  adding,  —  and 
an  ear  for  an  ear.  Philip  Nye,  in  his  lawfulness  of 
the  Oath  of  Supremacy,"^  says,  "  All  men  are  by 
NATURE  EQUAL ; "  yet  he  argues  the  supremacy  of 
the  king  and  his  government  in  ecclesiastical  affairs. 
Upham,  in  his  Century  Sermon,^  informs  us  that 
Hugh  Peters  reproved  Sir  Harry  Vane  for  his  con- 
duct towards  Mrs.  Hutchinson  and  her  company, 
and  "  plainly  insinuated,  that,  if  governors  would 
concern  themselves  only  with  the  things  of  Caesar, 
the  things  of  God  would  be  more  quiet  and  pros- 
perous." —  See  Upham,  Rat.  Dis.  293.  See  Perse- 
cution; Toleration. 

1  In  Han.  ii.  408.  ^  ib.  414,  415.  »  lb.  iii.  150.  *  lb.  187. 
*  Chap.  xvii.     ^*  In  Han.  iii.  93.     '  Page  17.     "  Page  46. 

MAGISTRATES  should  punish  rioters.  —  This 
was,  and  is,  the  universal  doctrine  of  Congregation- 
alists.  The  Fifteen  Propositions  to  Parliament  for 
Gathering  Independent  Churches  ^  has  the  follow- 
ing :  "  That  such  persons  who  shall  disturb  the 
people  of  God,  .  .  .  when  they  are  congregated  to 
worship  him  in  his  ordinances,  may  be  punished 
according  to  their  demerits." 

1  In  Han.  iii.  248. 

MAGISTRATES,  should  they  have  a  voice,  as  such^ 


MAJORITIES.  233 

in  the  doings  of  Ihe  churches? — Cambridge  Plat- 
form/ after  denying  their  power  to  restrain  churches, 
maintains  that  their  help  and  countenance,  when 
it  may  be  had,  should  not  be  slighted.  As  they 
were  usually  consulted  about  the  formation  of  new 
churches,  no  wonder  that  they  took  it  in  dudgeon 
when  a  church  was  gathered  without  their  consent, 
as  the  Massachusetts  records  abundantly  evince. 
All  this  may,  however,  be  accounted  for  by  their 
loyal  attachment  to  monarchical  and  magisterial 
government.  No  American  advocates  the  affirma- 
tive of  this  question  since  the  consummation  of  the 
Revolution. 

1  Page  61. 

MAJORITIES  have  a  right  to  govern  in  ihe 
church. —  Isaac  Chauncy^  says:  "  Whatever  passes 
in  the  church  by  a  majority  of  the  brethren  is  a 
church  act."  Letch  ford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,"  says : 
"  In  the  Bay,  the  churches  govern  each  by  all  the 
membera  unanimously,  or  else  by  the  major  part, 
wherein  every  one  hath  equal  vote  and  superspec- 
tion  with  their  ministers."  In  Portsmouth,  in  the 
early  part  of  the  last  century,  the  majority  of  the 
church  removed  to  a  new  place  of  worship  at 
the  north  part  of  the  town,  while  the  rest  remained, 
and  organized  themselves  into  a  distinct  church. 
The  majority  retained  the  name  of  the  First  Church.^ 
See  Unanimity. 

'  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  105.     '  In  Mass  Hist.  Soc.  Col. 
series  iii.  vol.  iii.  Epist.  to  the  Reader.    *  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  410, 
art.  Rogers,  Nathaniel. 
20* 


234  MARRIAGE. 

MAJORITIES,  where  they  ought  to  forbear  exer^ 
cising  their  natural  right.  —  Watts,  in  his  Founda- 
tion of  a  Christian  Church/  shows  that  the  greater 
number  must  always  rule,  but  that  they  are,  in  cer- 
tain cases,  under  moral  obligation  not  to  insist  on 
their  right ;  as,  for  instance,  in  receiving  a  new 
member  to  the  church  when  a  portion  seem  con- 
scientiously dissatisfied.  Hopkins^  shows  that  ma- 
jorities must  govern,  and  minorities  ought  to  rest 
satisfied,  save  in  cases  of  conscience,  where  they 
should  protest.  See  Upham's  Ratio  Disciplinae, 
145,  note.  It  is  understood  to  have  been  recently 
decided  by  a  council,  in  a  case  in  Salem,  Mass., 
that  a  majority  have  no  right  to  disband  a  church 
and  divide  the  property.  On  the  one  hand,  the 
sovereignty  of  the  majority  was  pleaded  ;  and,  on 
the  other,  that  the  majority  have  no  right  to  repu- 
diate their  own  covenant  engagements.  —  See 
Church,  majority  constitute  ;  Unanimity. 

1  Works,  iii.  240.     ^  System,  ii.  350—352. 

MARRIAGE  not  the  office-work  of  pastors.  —  Ro- 
binson, in  his  Apology,^  says  :  "  We  cannot  assent 
to  the  received  opinion,  and  practice  answerable,  in 
the  reformed  churches,  by  which  the  pastors  thereof 
do  celebrate  marriage  publicly  and  by  virtue  of  their 
office."  The  pastor's  office,  he  argues,  is  peculiar  to 
the  Christian  religion,  and  ought  not  to  be  stretched 
to  any  thing  else  but  what  is  peculiar  to  Christians ; 
which  marriage  is  not,  being  common  to  them  and 
the  Gentiles.  In  his  Answer  to  Hall,'  he  objects 
that  making  it  a  part  of  a  minister's  work  is  making 


MARRIAGE.  235 

it  a  sacrament.  Jacob's  Church  Confession,  art. 
xxiii.,'  says :  "  Concerning  marriage  and  burying  the 
dead,  we  believe  that  they  are  not  actions  of  a 
church  minister,  because  they  are  no  actions  spirit- 
ual, but  civil.  Neither  are  ministers  called  to  any 
such  business,  nor  is  there  so  much  as  one  example 
of  it  in  the  whole  book  of  God,  .  .  .  without  which 
warrant  we  believe  it  to  be  unlawful."  And  this, 
we  find,'*  was  the  practice  in  New  England  in  1633, 
though  they  could  not  make  a  law  to  hinder  minis- 
ters from  marrying,  because  that  would  be  against 
the  common  law  of  England.  Letchford^  says: 
"  Marriage  in  New  England  is  by  magistrates,  and 
not  by  ministers."  So  Punchard,  in  his  View,  191. 
The  Plymouth  Colony  laws^  enacted  in  1671,  that 
none  should  be  joined  in  marriage  but  by  magis- 
trates, or  such  persons  as  the  court  should  appoint 
where  no  magistrate  is  near. 

»  In  Punchard's  Hist.  349,  350  ;  and  Works,  iii.  45.  *  In  Han. 
i.  196  ;  and  Works,  iii.  412.  ^  lb.  300.  ■*  Winthrop's  Journal,  i. 
323.    ^  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  iii.  94.    «  Page  272. 

MARRIAGE,  may  it  he  solemnized  b?/  ministers  ?  — 
Johnson,  in  his  Christian  Plea,^  maintains  that  the 
requiring  of  it  by  ministers,  with  prescribed  liturgies, 
tended  to  confirm  the  Papists  in  their  error  of  its 
being  a  sacrament ;  yet  he  suggests  whether  it  may 
not  be  solemnized  by  ministers  as  well  as  others,  so 
as  it  be  not  imposed  upon  them,  nor  observed  with 
superstition.  Cotton  Mather^  asserts  that  in  New 
England,  in  his  day,  it  was  usually  solemnized  by 
pastors,  though   formerly  it  was  always  done  by 


% 


236  MEMBERS. 

magistrates.    Massachusetts  Province  Laws'  made 
provision  for  its  solemnization  by  ministers  as  early     ^ 
as  1692. 

'  In  Ilan.  i.  319,  320.  -Rat.  Dis.  Ill,  112.  =*  Page  19  (Ed. 
1699),  et  al. 

MARRIAGE,  mai/  it  be  solemnized  on  the  Lorcfs 
day  ?  —  Cotton  Mather  ^  declares  that  "  the  churches 
of  New  England  wholly  decline  them  "  on  that  day. 
He  quotes  Zepperus,  Voetius,  and  an  army  of 
others,  to  show  that  it  is  wrong  to  do  it  on  the  Sab- 
bath. 

»  Rat.  Dis.  112,  113. 

MEETING-HOUSE.  —  Cotton  Mather^  declares 
that  this  was  the  term  usually  employed  by  New 
England  Christians  to  designate  a  place  of  worship, 
but  that  they  did  not  admit  the  idea  of  a  holiness 
in  places.  Isaac  Chauncy^  asserts  that  "there  is  . 
no  just  ground  from  Scripture  to  apply  such  a  trope 
(as  church)  to  a  house  for  a  public  assembly."  It 
must,  however,  be  admitted  that  this  trope  was  in 
early  use  among  the  churches,^  though  I  deem  it  an 
improper  use  and  productive  of  evil,  in  conveying  a 
false  impression  of  holiness  in  places.  —  See  Con- 
secrations ;  Dedications. 

*  Rat.  Dis.  5.  ^  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  2.  ^  See  Lord 
King's  Enquiry,  part  i.  4,  5. 

MEMBERS,  church,  should  consist  of  experimental 
Christians.  —  Robinson,  in  his  Apology.*  says  that 
it  behoveth  every  one  to  believe  and  "  know  (?)  that 


MEMBERJ5.  237 

he  is  a  true  Christian,"  before  he  can  hope  to  please 
God  in  the  performance  of  this  or  that  particular 
Christian  work.  Burton,  in  his  Protestation  Pro- 
tested," says  :  "  A  particular  church,  rightly  collected 
and  constituted,  consists  of  such  as  are  living  mem- 
bers of  Christ  the  head."  Hooker,  in  his  Survey,* 
answers  Rutherford,  who  plead  that  nothing  more 
was  necessary  to  admission,  except  that  they  pro- 
fess before  men  the  faith,  desire  the  seals,  and  crave 
fellowship  with  the  visible  church,  saying :  "  The 
apostle  commanded  to  turn  away  from  such  as, 
having  the  form  of  godliness,  deny  the  power 
thereof."  The  Rejoinder  to  Prynne's  Reply  ^  says  : 
"  The  matter  of  a  church  should  be  saints.  The 
apostle  wrote  to  the  churches  as  saints."  Isaac 
Chauncy*  says  the  elders  ought  to  inquire  of  the 
candidates  the  reason  of  their  hope,  whether  it  be 
grounded  on  the  fundamentals  of  Christian  doc- 
trine; and  whether  their  conversation  answer  to 
their  profession.  Increase  Mather,  in  his  Vindica- 
tion of  the  Order  of  the  New  England  Churches,^ 
says  :  "  A  church  ought  to  consist  of  true  believers." 
Pierce,  in  his  Vindication  of  Dissenters,^  says : 
"  Wickliffe  defined  a  church  to  consist  only  of  per- 
sons predestinated."  With  the  above  principles 
agree  Cotton's  Plea  for  the  New  England  Churches, 
in  Hutchinson's  History  of  Massachusetts,  i.  370, 
371 ;  Increase  Mather's  Disquisition  on  Ecclesiasti- 
cal Councils,  preface,  vi. ;  Propositions  to  Parlia- 
ment, in  Han.  iii.  247;  Congregational  Union  of 
England  and  Wales,  Principles  of  Discipline,  ib. 
600;    Richard    Mather's    Church   Government  and 


238  MEMBERS. 

Church  Covenant,  9;  Cotton's  Way  of  the  Churches, 
57  ;  Punchard's  History,  47,  109 ;  Cambridge  Plat- 
form, chap.  xii.  sect.  2 ;  and  Owen's  Nature  of  a 
Gospel  Church,  in  Works,  xx.  357;  with  muUis 
cdiis.  —  See  Upham's  Kat.  Dis.  51 — 54,  and  Pun- 
chard's View,  38, 44.  See  next  article ;  also  Half- 
way Covenant. 

»  In  Han.  i.  384  ;  and  Works,  iii.  65.  ^  lb.  ii.  73.  »  Part  i.  32. 
*Page  3.  *Div.  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  106,  107.  ^  Page  13. 
'  Pages  4—6. 

MEMBERS  satisfy  the  church  at  admission.  — 
Richard  Mather  ^  says  :  Paul  was  not  received  till 
the  church  was  satisfied  of  his  conversion.  And,'' 
The  church  have  a  right  to  choose  both  their  officers 
and  brethren.  (True,  if  they  proceed  according  to 
the  rule,  and  receive  or  reject  as  Christ  does.  The 
churches  are  the  earthly  judges  to  admit  or  reject 
him.)  He  quotes'  Zepperus,  De  Politia  Ecclesia, 
and  R.  Parker,  Politia  Ecclesise,  showing  that  the 
reformed  churches  received  their  baptized  children 
only  when  they  professed  piety,  and  were  pro- 
pounded in  the  assembly.  Cotton,  in  his  Holiness 
of  Church  Members,  says :  ^  The  church  .  .  .  can- 
not lawfully  receive  members,  .  .  .  but  such  as  are, 
in  a  charitable  discretion,  esteemed  saints  by  calling. 
In  his  Keys*  he  says  the  brethren  of  the  church 
have  power  and  liberty  of  propounding  any  just  ex- 
ception against  any  such  as  offer  themselves  to  be 
admitted  into  their  communion  ;  and  he  quotes  the 
case  of  Saul,  and  the  proposition  of  Peter,  con- 
cerning Cornelius :  "  Can  any  forbid  water  ?  "     The 


MEMBERS.  239 

Saint's  Apology^  says:  The  matter  of  this  is  a 
company  of  saints  of  whom  .  .  .  the  church  that 
admits  them  ought  to  judge  of  every  one  of  them, 
that  Christ  has  begun  a  good  work  in  them,  and 
will  finish  it."  The  Low  Country  Exiles,  in  their 
Confession,  art.  xxiv.,  say  :  ^  "  Christ  hath  given 
power  to  receive  in  or  cut  off  any  member  to  the 
whole  body  together,  in  any  Christian  congrega- 
tion ; "  by  which  they  mean  covenant-church.  Dr. 
Stiles,  in  his  Convention  Sermon,^  says :  "  There 
was  never  an  instance  of  admission  to  the  churches 
without  the  votes  of  the  brethren,"  because  of  the 
spirit  of  liberty  in  the  churches.  The  authors  of 
Gospel  Order  Revived  say :  ^  A  church  has  no 
more  right  to  debar  those  who  refuse  to  relate  their 
Christian  experience,  than  to  require  oaths  and 
subscriptions  and  conformity  to  a  thousand  more 
ceremonies.  But  this  was  never  the  generally 
received  doctrine.  From  Upham's  Life  of  Sir 
Henry  Vane  the  Younger  ^^  we  learn  that  Win- 
throp  maintained  "  that  the  churches  had  power  to 
receive  or  reject  at  discretion  ;  "  but  Vane  thought 
it  was  "  only  at  the  discretion  of  Christ."  Cam- 
bridge Platform,  chap.  xii.  sect.  22 ;  Hooker's  Sur- 
vey, part  i.  47,  54,  93 ;  Owen's  Original  of  Churches, 
in  Works,  xx.  185 ;  and  Watts's  Foundation  of  a 
Christian  Church,  in  Works,  iii.  200,  advocate  the 
necessity  of  their  satisfying  the  members  of  perso- 
nal piety. 

1  Apology,  18.  2  lb.  23.  3  lb.  34,  35.  *  Page  24.  *  Page  38. 
•  In  Han.  ii.  231.  '  lb.  i.  95.  '  Page  64.  »  Page  8.  *"  In 
Sparks's  Am.  Biog.  iv.  152,  153. 


240  MEMBERS. 

MEMBERS,  examination  of^  for  admission. — 
Welde,  in  his  Answer  to  Rathband/  shows  how 
these  were  conducted,  —  by  the  elders  in  private 
with  the  more  bashful,  and  by  a  public  relation 
with  those  that  were  able.  And  though  some  few 
be  dissatisfied,  they  used  to  submit  to  the  rest,  and 
sit  down  satisfied,  unless  their  reasons  be  such  as 
may  convince  the  church.  (See  Majorities;  Mi- 
norities.) Hooker  in  his  Survey,"  describes  the 
method  of  applying  to  the  elders,  who  propound 
them,  if,  on  inquiry,  they  consider  them  fit.  The 
church  should  then  repair,  and  inquire  of  them,  in 
separate  companies,  and  see  if  they  live  in  no 
known  sin,  and  can  give  a  reason  of  the  hope  that 
is  in  them.  They  may  converse  with  the  women 
privately,  though  women  may  speak  publicly  to 
give  a  reason  of  their  hope,  and  confess  their  sins. 
Ii^crease  Mather,  in  his  Vindication,^  shows  that 
they  ought  to  be  tried ;  but  their  examination 
should  be  so  tender  that  the  weakest  Christian 
may  be  admitted.  Eliot  (in  his  Ecclesiastical  His- 
tory of  New  England,  in  Historical  Society's  Col 
lection,  series  i.  vol.  ix.  3),  and  Neal  (History  o± 
New  England,  i.  273 — 275),  treat  this  subject  es 
sentially  in  the  same  way. 

» In  Han.  ii.  302.     »  Part  iii.  4—6.     '  Page  17,  19. 

MEMBERS,  church ;  mode  of  receiving,  —  Cotton 
Mather  ^  describes  this  to  be  "  by  vote  of  the  church, 
and  assenting  to  the  covenant."  Ames,  in  his 
Marrow  of  Sacred  Divinity,'^  says  :  "  None  are 
rightly  admitted  to  the  church  but  by  confession  of 


MEMBERS.  241 

faith  and  promise  of  obedience."  Letchford,  in  his 
Plain  Dealing,'  shows  the  manner  to  have  been 
much  as  at  the  present  day,  save  that  the  men 
usually  declare  the  mode  of  their  conversion  in 
public,  and  the  women  have  the  relations  of  their 
experience  read,,  as  taken  by  the  elders  at  their  ex- 
aminations. He  asserts  '^  that  the  members  were 
voted  into  the  church  at  the  time  that  they  were 
admitted.  Morton,  in  his  New  England  Memo- 
rial,* says:  "Some  were  admitted  by  expressing 
their  consent  to  the  written  Confession  of  Faith 
and  Covenant ;  others  did  answer  questions  about 
the  principles  of  religion,  that  were  publicly  pro- 
pounded to  them ;  some  did  present  their  confession 
in  writing,  which  was  read  for  them ;  and  some, 
that  were  able  and  willing,  did  make  their  confes- 
sion in  their  own  words  and  way."  See  Upham's 
Rat.  Dis.  98. —  See  Confessions;  Covenant; 
Creeds. 

*  Rat.  Dis.  91.  '  Page  141.  ^  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol. 
iii.  67,  68.    *  lb.  71.    *  Page  U6. 

MEMBERS,  scandalous,  not  received  by  recommen- 
dation from  other  churches.  —  Richard  Mather  ^  says 
those  emigrants  who  are  known  to  be  godly  are  all 
admitted  to  some  church  on  their  own  desire,  unless 
they  have  given  offence  by  their  walk:  in  this  case, 
they  must  give  evidence  of  repentance.  Hooker' 
shows,  that,  if  two  or  three  witnesses  show  a 
recommended  member  to  be  scandalous,  he  is  to  be 
rejected. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  and  Ch.  Coy.  8.     »  Survey,  part  i.  241. 
21 


242  MEMBERS. 

MEMBERS,  removing- ;  should  they  be  examined, 
confess,  and  covenant  aneio  ?  —  Richard  Mather  ^  af- 
firms that  they  should  ;  "  for  the  former  church  may 
have  erred  in  receiving  them."  Hooker^  says  they 
may  be  received  without,  if  their  praise  is  in  all  the 
churches;  or  the  church  may  examine,  and,  if  they 
are  scandalous,  should  reject  them.  Winthrop' 
shows  that  Cotton  was  thus  examined  when  he  was 
received  to  the  church  in  Boston.  Mitchell  ^  declares 
the  right  to  examine,  but  says  that  it  is  not  generally 
practised.  Milton^  says  the  covenant  should  be 
repeated,  unless  ths  church  have  ample  testimonials 
from  some  other  orthodox  church.  —  See  Profession 
of  faith. 

*  Ch.  Gov.  and  Ch.  Gov.  30.  ^  Survey,  part  iii.  7.  ^  Journal, 
i.  110.     ^  Guide,  224,  225.     ^  Chris.  Doc.  ii.  202,  203. 

MEMBERS  remove  with  consent. — Welde*  shows 
Rathband  that  they  should  first  consult  the  church 
with  whom  they  are  in  covenant,  but  the  church 
never  holds  one  a  member  against  his  will.  He 
shows  that,  in  extraordinary  cases,  there  should  be 
a  council;  but  the  church  cannot  act  against  their, 
own  consciences,  and  say  they  are  satisfied  when 
they  are  not.  Cambridge  Platform  ^  says  :  '•  They 
who  are  joined  with  consent  may  not  depart  with- 
out consent,  unless  forced  thereto.  If  a  member's 
departure  be  manifestly  unsafe  and  sinful,  the  church 
may  not  consent  thereto;  for,  in  so  doing,  they 
should  partake  of  his  sin.  If  the  case  be  doubtful, 
...  it  seemeth  best  to  leave  the  matter  to  God,  and 
not  forcibly  to  detain  him."     Isaac  Chauncy^  says: 


MEMBERS.  243 

"A  member  may  not  depart  to  non-communion,  or 
to  the  communion  of  another  church,  without  the 
leave  of  the  church  of  which  he  is  a  member.  Such 
a  deserter  is  a  felo  de  se^  and  doth  disfranchise  and 
excommunicate  himself."  See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis. 
147;  Punchard's  View,  173. —  See  Affinity;  Dis- 
mission ;  Withdrawing. 

*  In  Han.  ii.  324.     ^  Chap.  xiii.  sect.  2,  3.    •*  Divine  Inst.  Cong. 
Churches,  116,  117. 

MEMBERS,  may  they  ever  be  received  from  other 
churches  without  dismission  and  recommendation?  — 
Increase  Mather,  in  his  Vindication,*  shows  that 
dismission  and  recommendation  are  scriptural  and 
reasonable,  and  that  "  a  church  ought  not  to  receive 
a  member  from  another  church,  without  endeavors 
of  mutual  satisfaction  of  the  churches  concerned." 
I.  Chauncy  ^  says :  If,  upon  the  use  of  all  due 
means,  the  church  will  grant  no  dismission,  the 
member  refused  may  join  another  church  as  a  non 
member.  Cotton  Mather,  in  his  Ratio  Disciplinse,^ 
lays  down  a  rule  for  a  case  which  he  says  "  perhaps 
never  happened,"  in  which  a  church  refuse  to  receive 
a  member  where  a  council  advise  to  it,  viz.  that  he 
be  received  to  some  other  church  in  the  neighbor- 
hood. Cleveland,  in  his  Narrative  of  the  Conduct 
of  the  Fourth  Church  in  Ipswich,*  quotes  from 
Watts's  Foundation  of  a  Christian  Church:  "If 
particular  persons  cannot  agree  with  the  major  part, 
they  may  withdraw,  if  the  church  refuse  to  dismiss 
them;  for  Christian  churches  must  have  all  voluntary 
members,  and  are  not  to  be  turned  into  prisons." 


244  MEMBERS. 

Cleveland  adds:  "A  member  has  a  right  to  seek 
his  edification  where  he  can  best  obtain  it.*'  This 
is  particularly  allowable  to  members  in  corrupt 
churches.  Cambridge  Platform  *  points  out  the 
way  for  such  to  proceed,  viz.  by  calling  a  council 
of  neighbor-churches,  and,  with  their  advice,  offering 
themselves  to  the  fellowship  of  another  church. 
Owen,  in  his  Answer  to  Stillingfieet,  sect.  3,*  points 
out  the  proper  course  of  such  members  as  are  in  a 
church  with  defective  rules,  viz.  to  try  peaceably  to 
introduce  a  right  state  of  things  ;  consider  whether 
they  are  required  to  do  any  thing  unlawful ;  if  so, 
and  no  forbearance  is  allowed,  they  must  not  con- 
demn them  (if  they  are  Christians),  but  peaceably 
withdraw.  This  was  the  principle  on  which  the 
true  Congregationalists  separated  from  the  Episco- 
pal church,  because  it  required  them  to  do  what 
they  deemed  wrong. —  See  Affinity;  Dismission; 
Ceremonies;  Liturgies;  Habits;  Separation; 
Schism  ;  Nonconformity  ;  Withdrawing  ;  Mr. 
Davenport's  case,  in  Pastor  not  lightly  removed. 

^  Pages  109—113.  ^  Page  121.  ^Vsige  161.  ^Page  38. 
*.Chap.  XV.  sect.  2.     ^  In  Works,  xx.  321. 

MEMBERS,  pious  ones  of  heretical  and  scandalous 
churches  to  be  received.  —  Cambridge  Platform  ^  di- 
rects that  such  should  be  received  to  wonted  com- 
munion ;  "  for  it  is  not  equal  that  the  innocent 
should  suffer  with  the  offensive ; "  —  a  principle 
which  would,  if  applied,  help  out  of  difficulty  those 
who  scruple  the  regularity  of  a  church  to  which 
some  credible  saints  belong. 

*  Chap.  XV.  sect.  2. 


MINISTERS.  245 

MEMBERS  continue  such  of  the  former  church, 
till  received  by  the  church  to  ivhich  they  are  recom- 
mended.—  Cotton  Mather'  shows  this,  and  it  is  the 
universal  principle  acknowledged  by  Congregation- 

alists. 

iRat.  Dis.  140. 

MEMBERS  removing  should  transfer  their  mem- 
bership to  the  churches  ivhere  they  remove.  —  This  is 
another  universally  approved  principle.  Cotton 
Mather  shows  its  propriety,  and^  says:  If  they  do 
not  ask  it,  the  church  sometimes  sends  it. 

*  Rat.  Dis.  140, 141. 

See  further,  for  Members,  under  Churches,  cen- 
sures, 8^c.  in  the  people  ;  Members  have  equal  rigiits. 

MINISTERS,  Wmt— Thomas  Goodwin'  defines 
them  "  under-rowers  to  the  church,"  a  literal  trans- 
lation of  1  Cor.  iv.  1 ;  and  "  servants  of  Christ," 
Rom.  XV.  16 ;  "  dispensers  of  the  gospel,"  Gal.  iii. 
5, 11 ;  Rom.  xv.  16. 

^  Catechism,.  10,  11. 

MINISTERS,  are  they  successors  of  Jewish  priests? 
Punchard'  shows  from  history,  that  the  doctrine 
that  they  were  their  successors,  as  it  prevailed  in 
the  second  century,  was  one  great  means  of  cor- 
rupting the  churches,  giving  rise  to  the  different 
grades,  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  (soon  it  was 
found  more  analogous  to  have  one  high  priest). 
He   quotes   Mosheim,  showing  that  this   doctrine 

21* 


246  MINISTERS. 

soon  led  to  other  errors,  among  which  was  this,  —  an 
official  elevation  and  sacredness  in  the  clergy,  which 
Christ  never  authorized.  Owen,  in  his  Duty  of 
Pastor  and  People,^  chapters  iii.,  iv.,  shows  that 
appropriating  the  title  priest  to  ministers  is  of  Ro- 
man origin.  — »See  Neander's  Planting  and  Training 
of  the  Church,  84 ;  and  his  Church  History,  i.  sect. 
2,  page  150. 

» Hist.  22.     «  Works,  xix.  24—35. 

-J 

MINISTERS  not  successors  of  the  apostles  by  or- 
dinalion.  —  See  Bishops  ;  Ordination  by  direct 
succession  unnecessary. 

MINISTERS,  of  equal  rank.  —  This  doctrine  was 
received  by  the  Paulicians  in  the  seventh  century, 
though  it  had  been  abandoned.  In  1572,  Mr. 
Charke  of  Peter  House,  Cambridge,  said  that  "  there 
ought  to  be  a  parity  among  ministers,"  &c. ;  for 
which  he  was  expelled  the  University.  The  same 
year,  Mr.  Field  and  Mr.  Wilcox  were  shut  up  in 
Newgate  for  petitioning  parliament  on  this  subject. 
The  cry  was,  that  levelling  the  bishops  would  lead 
to  levelling  all  the  nobility  in  the  land.^  The  first 
claim  to  an  inequality  (jure  divino)  in  England  was 
set  up  by  Dr.  Bancroft,  at  St.  Paul's  Cross,  January 
12,  1588,  and  at  once  aroused  all  the  conforming 
Puritans  in  opposition.  Sir  Francis  Knollys  took 
the  lead,  and  "  wrote  to  the  learned  Dr.  Reynolds 
of  Oxford  for  his  opinion."  Dr.  R.  at  once  cited  a 
host  of  English  Episcopal  authors,  maintaining 
their  equality  save  by  the  queen's  mere  civil  ap- 


MINISTER.  247 

pointment.  Among  these  he  quotes  Bishop  Jewell, 
who  cited  Jerome,  Ambrose,  and  Austin  to  their 
equality.  He  (Dr.  R.)  also  directly  and  indirectly 
quotes  a  score  or  more  of  eminent  reformers  and 
English  prelates  to  the  point  of  their  equality  by 
divine  appointment ;  and  says  :  "  All  who  have 
labored  in  reforming  the  church  for  five  hundred 
years  (and  this  was  nearly  three  hundred  years  ago) 
have  taught,  that  all  pastors,  be  they  entitled  bi- 
shops or  priests,  have  equal  authority  and  power 
by  God's  word."^  Dr.  Chauncy,  in  his  Dudlean 
Lecture,'  shows  that  the  apostles  instituted  but 
one  order  of  ministers ;  gave  no  instructions  con- 
cerning the  fitness  for  different  orders  of  it,  and  no 
different  rules  for  those  who  were  to  ordain  mini- 
sters of  different  grades.  No  ministers  are  found  in 
the  apostles'  times  but  of  one  order ;  and  "  bishop  " 
and  "  presbyter "  are  used  interchangeably  in  the 
Greek  in  Acts  xx.  17  and  28.  The  Reviewer  of 
Sparks's  Letters  in  Answer  to  Wyatt's  Sermon  * 
says  the  arguments  adduced  for  three  orders  would 
prove  the  existence  of  six  or  seven,  as  apostles,  pro- 
phets, evangelists,  elders,  &c.,  &c.  —  See  French 
Confession,  and  Confession  of  Low  Country  Exiles, 
in  Hanbury,  i.  92.     See  Bishops 

»  Neal'8  Puritans,  i.  121,  122.  *  lb.  186,  187.  ^  Pages  13—25. 
*  Page  9. 

MINISTER,  calling;  in  what  does  it  consist?  — 
Owen  *  says  that  it  arises  from  Christ's  institution 
of  the  office ;  from  God's  providential  designation  of 
the  person ;  and  from  the  church's  call,  election,  or 


248  MINISTER. 

appointment;  and  their  acceptation.     Richard  Ma- 
ther^ says  the  outward  calling  of  a  minister  consists 
in  election   by  the  people;  which  he  sustains  by 
quotations    from    Mornay    and   from    Chrysostom. 
Yet  he  says  the  calling  pf  many  ministers  (Episco- 
pal) in  England  may  be  excused  because  they  were 
accepted  by  the  people.     In  his  Apology^  he  shows 
that  ministers  have  power  over  the  churches  only 
by  virtue  of  their  choosing  them  to  rule  over  them. 
(See  Elders  ride  as  moderators.)     Jacob's  Church, 
in  their  Confession  (art.  x.),'*  say  :  "  We  believe  that 
the  essence  of  a  minister's  call  under  the  gospel  is 
the  congregation's  (i.e.  church's)  consent."     They 
assert,*  in  their  Plea  for  Toleration,  that  ministers' 
calling  is  by  the  consent  of  the  several  congrega- 
tions.    Holding  that  a  minister  must  be  made  by  a 
bishop  or  another  minister,  is  to  hold  "  that  a  mini- 
ster is  before  and  greater  than  a  church ;  a  great 
and  harmful  error,  and  contrary  to  1  Cor.  iii.  21 — 
23."     Increase  Mather,  in  his   Vindication  of  the 
Order  of  the  New  England  Churches,^  enumerates 
among  those  things  ("  which  to  espouse  is  to  give 
up   the  whole   of   Congregationalism "),   "  that   a 
minister's  call  consists  not  in  election,  but  in  the 
imposition  of  hands."     With  this  doctrine  agree 
Increase    Mather    (Disquisition    on    Ecclesiastical 
Councils,  preface),  who    quotes  many  authors  to 
sustain  it;  and  Trumbull  (History  of  Connecticut, 
i.  296),  where  he  declares  that  "  such  was  the  opi- 
nion  of   the    principal   divines   who   settled  New 
England  and  Connecticut."     Cambridge  Platform 
declares  explicitly  ^  that  it  consists,  not  in  his  ordi- 


MINISTERS.  249 

nation,  but  the  church's  election  and  his  accep- 
tance. —  See  Calling  ;  Elders  ;  Imposition  of 
hands;  Ordination;  Pastor. 

Works,  xix.  70.     '  Ch.  Gov.  and  Ch.  Gov.  67.    '  Page  24. 
*  In  Han.  i.  296.    *  lb.  307,  308.    «Tage  8.     '  Chap.  ix.  sect.  2. 


MINISTERS,  authority  of,  what.  —  Goodwin ' 
shows  that  they  have  the  "rw/e  over^^  the  church  in 
these  three  things :  "  To  declare  to  them  the  myste- 
ries of  the  kingdom  of  God;  so  that,  whether  they 
exhort,  teach,  or  admonish,  they  do  it  with  autho- 
rity ;  to  call  the  church  assemblies  together,  and  to 
dismiss  them,  and  moderate  matters  in  the  assem- 
bly ; "  and  "  they  are  the  mouth  and  hands  of  the 
church,  by  which  they  execute  the  power  of  the 
censures."  This  is  the  doctrine  which  has  been 
hitherto  maintained  by  Congregationalists  ;  yet 
they  have  a  remedy  in  the  case  of  mal-administra- 
tion  of  ministers,  —  all  power  coming  back  into 
their  own  hands  at  their  own  election.  Ainsworth, 
in  his  reply  to  Clyfton,^  says :  "  To  give  votes  in 
deciding  of  controversies,  and  judging  of  sinners,  is 
not  a  part  of  government,  but  of  power  and  right 
that  saints  out  of  office  have."  Watts,  in  his  Foun- 
dation of  a  Christian  Church,^  says  the  rule  of 
ministers  is  to  lead  in  worship,  not  to  impose  odd 
inventions.  Paul  had  no  dominion  over  men's  faith. 
The  judge  has  no  power  to  make  law:  he  explains, 
and  the  jury  decide.  Ministers  have  no  power  to 
command  any  thing  but  what  is  found  in  the  Bible. 
—  See  Elders  rule  as  moderators ;   Government, 


250  MINISTERS. 

churchy  in  the  people;  Power,  churchy  installed  in 
the  ministry  or  the  brethren  ? 

*  Catechism,  12.     "  In  Ilan.  i.  249.     ^  Works,  iii.  218,  219,  226. 

MINISTERS,  people  may  do  their  work  for  them 
if  they  neglect  it.  —  John  Robinson,  in  his  Justifica- 
tion of  Separation,  says  :  ^  "  Yea,  even  where  officers 
are,  if  they  fail  in  their  duties,  the  people  may 
enterprise  matters  needful,  however  you  make  the 
minister  the  primum  movens,  and  would  tie  all  to 
his  fingers."  Jacob's  Church,"  in  their  Confession 
(art.  xiv.),  say :  "Officers  have  nothing  more  than 
what  the  congregation  doth  commit  unto  them,  and 
which  they  may,  when  need  requireth,  take  from 
them,  yea,  to  their  utter  deposing  an(J  also  rejection 
out  of  the  church,  if  such  necessity  be."  Welde, 
in  his  Reply  to  Rathband,^  however,  maintains  that 
they  must  first  depose  him  before  they  can  take  his 
office-work  from  him  ;  "  but  in  no  case,  w^iile  he 
abides  in  office,  to  resume  their  power,  and  enter 
upon  his  work."  —  See  Elders,  is  one  or  more  ne- 
cessary to  church  acts  ?  Officers  abdicate  when  they 
refuse  to  do  the  duties  pertaining;  to  their  office ;  Ju- 
risdiction; Government,  cimV;  Resistance. 

» In  Han.  i.  212  ;  and  Works,  ii.  148.     ^  lb.  297.     '^  lb.  ii.  317. 

MINISTERS  should  submit  to  the  censure  of  the 
church. —  Goodwin^  shows  this  from  the  example 
of  Peter.  —  See  Pastor,  is  he  censurable  by  his 
church  ?  Elders,  is  one  or  more  necessary  to  church 
action  ? 

*  Catechism,  11. 


MINISTERS.  251 

MINISTER^  how  dismissed  from  his  pastoral 
charge.  —  Punch ard,  in  his  View/  gives  the  details 
of  a  proper  procedure,  save  that  he  makes  it  regular 
for  a  people  who  want  to  dismiss  theif  pastor  to 
send  a  delegation  to  suggest  the  expediency  of  his 
asking  a  dismission ;  thus  putting  a  false  coloring 
on  the  whole  matter,  representing  that  the  first 
movement  originates  with  him  rather  than  with 
them.  See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  124—133  ;  and  Ba- 
con's Church  Manual,  139,  140.  —  See  next  article. 

^  Pages  170—177. 

MINISTERS,  how  deposed.— Hhe  Answer  of  the 
New  England  Elders^  asserts  that  the  church,  in 
the  name  of  Christ,  gave  their  minister  power  to  be 
what  he  is ;  and  they  may  on  as  good  grounds  de- 
pose him  from  it,  as  they  called  him  to  it.  Ro- 
binson, in  his  Reply  to  Barnard,"' says :  "If  the 
ministers  will  deal  corruptly, .  .  .  the  brethren  are  to 
censure,  depose,  reject,  and  avoid  them."  In  the 
Appendix  to  ]\Ir.  Perkins,^  he  says :  "  If  an  officer 
be  found  unfaithful,  he  is  by  the  church  to  be 
warned  to  take  heed  to  his  ministry,  .  .  .  which  if 
he  neglect  to  do,  by  the  same  power  (the  church's) 
which  set  him  up,  he  is  to  be  put  down  and  de- 
posed." Wise  "^  quotes  Cyprian :  "  When  bishops 
prove  wicked  or  heretical,  the  churches  have  power 
to  degrade  and  depose  them,  and  to  choose  others 
in  their  room."  Cambridge  Platform  ^  says  :  "  In 
case  an  elder  offend  incorrigibly,  ...  as  the  church 
had  power  to  call  him  to  his  office,  so  they  have 
power,  according   to   order  (the   council  of  other 


252  MINISTERS. 

churches,  where  it  may  be  had,  directing  thereto), 
to  remove  him  from  his  office."  Hooker  ^  shows, 
that,  in  case  the  officer  is  heretical  and  obstinately 
wicked,  tlie  church  have  power  to  reject  him,  and 
make  him  no  officer;  for  a  church  is  before  its  offi- 
cers. He  shows  "^  that  they  who  have  power  to 
"  depose  "  their  officers  have  the  power  of  judgment 
over  them.  Hutchinson,  in  his  History  of  Massa- 
chusetts,^ lays  it  down  as  the  received  opinion  of 
the  fathers  of  New  England,  that  it  is  in  the  power 
of  churches  to  call  their  officers,  and  remove  them 
from  office,  —  the  advice  of  neighbor-churches, 
where  it  may  conveniently  be  done,  being  first  had. 
Samuel  Mather  devotes  the  fourth  chapter  of  his 
Apology  to  prove  this  right  in  the  churches.  He 
quotes  from  Clement,  Origen,  and  Cyprian,  to  the 
point;  and  maintains  the  right  from  the  power  of 
self-preservation  and  the  principles  of  the  Platform. 
The  Massachusetts  Convention  of  1778,  in  their 
Observations  on  the  Plan  of  Church  Government,^ 
assert  that  the  churches  have  power  to  depose,  but 
are  morally  culpable  if  they  do  it  without  or  con- 
trary to  a  council.*  The  power  resides  in  them 
rnily-i  and  not  in  any  synod  or  ecclesiastical  council. 
In  exercising  it  without  counsel,  they  act  contrary 
to  order.  Baynes,  in  his  Diocesan's  TriaV"  says : 
"  If  their  own  churches  have  no  power  over  them, 
it  will  be  hard  to  show  wherein  others  have  such 


♦  This  was  about  the  time  of  the  controversy  concerning  veto-power  ; 
and,  if  we  cannot  see  how  they  are  "morally  culpable  "  for  using  their 
rightful  power,  we  may  reflect  that  "  that  which  is  crooked  cannot  bo 
made  straight." 


MINISTERS.  253 

power  and  jurisdiction  over  persons  who  belong  not 
to  their  own  churches." —  See  Bacon's  Church  Ma- 
nual, 140,  141. 

»  Page  77.  ^  In  Punchard's  Hist.  330 ;  and  Works,  ii.  174. 
»  lb.  353  ;  and  Works,  iii.  431.  *  Vindication,  13,  14.  *  Chap.  x. 
sect.  6.  «  Survey,  part  i.  93.  '  Page  196.  «  Vol.  i.  381.  »  Pages 
6,  7.     '°  Page  88.  * 

MINISTERS,  their  character-  not  indelible,  —  This 
was  the  doctrine  of  the  Brownists.^  The  early  Con- 
gregationalists  also  held  the  same.  The  New  Eng- 
land Elders"  say:  "  We  have  no  such  indelible  cha- 
racter iniprinted  on  a  minister,  that  he  must  needs 
be  so  for  ever,  because  he  once  was  so.  His  minis- 
try ceasing,  the  minister  ceaseth  also."  Allin  and 
Shepard,  in  their  Defence  of  the  Nine  Positions,' 
inquire,  "  What  authority  has  he  to  minister  to 
any  church,  if  j:hey  will  not  hear  him  ?  "  A  dis- 
missed minister,  they  maintain,  is  no  longer  an 
officer  in  any  church  of  God ;  and  the  reason  is,  a 
minister's  office  in  the  church  is  no  indelible  cha- 
racter. Cambridge  Platform  *  says :  "  He  that  is 
clearly  loosed  from  his  office-relation  to  that  church 
whereof  he  was  a  minister,  cannot  be  looked  at  as 
an  officer,  nor  perform  any  act  of  office  in  any 
other  church,  unless  he  be  again  called  to  office." 
Cotton  Mather^  quotes  John  Owen:  "  We  have  no 
concernment  in  the  figment  of  an  indelible  charac- 
ter, .  .  .  yet  we  do  not  leave  the  minister  when  we 
go  from  home."  He  distinguished  between  an 
officer  of  a  church,  and  one  providentially  called  to 
preach  the  word.  John  Robinson,  in  the  Appendix 
to  JVIr.  Perkins,^  says :  Those  that  are  out  of  office, 
22 


254  MINISTERS. 

we  are  told,  are  to  feed  the  flock  in  the  exercise  of 
prophecy,  which,  it  is  said,  is  proved  by  examples 
in  the  Jewish  church,  Luke  ii.  42, 46,  47  ;  iv.  16, 18 ; 
Acts  viii.  4;  xi.  19—21;  xiii.  14—16;  xviii.  24— 
26  ;  and  by  the  command  of  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles, Luke  ix.  1 ;  x.  1 ;  Rom.  xii.  9  ;  1  Peter  iv.  10, 
11;  1  Cor.  xiv.  1,  &c.  —  See  next  article;  also 
J* RE ACH,  toho  may ?  Prophesying;  Officers,  their 
office f  qualifications,  and  jurisdiction. 

'  Neal,  i.  150.  ^  Ans.  77.  '^  In  Han.  iii.  42.  "  Chap.  ix.  sect.  7. 
*  Magnalia,  ii.  205.  ^  In  Puncliarcl's  Hist.  253  ;  and  Works,  iii. 
432,  433. 

MINISTERS,  mat/  they  administer  seals  ivhere 
they  are  not  pastors? — The  early  Congregational- 
ists  generally  maintained  the  negative.  The  New 
England  Elders  *  declare  that  a  minister  may  not 
perform  a  ministerial  act  in  any  other  church. 
Goodwin  devoted  the  seventh  chapter  of  his  seventh 
book  to  show  that  they  could  not  lawfully  be  ad- 
ministered anywhere  but  in  a  particular  church,  b)- 
their  own  ministers,  and  that  they  might  not  havf 
them  administered  to  different  branches  succes 
sively.  Paget  (a  Puritan  Conformist)  inquires:^ 
"  If  members  may  lawfully  receive  the  LordV 
Supper  in  another  church,  .  .  .  why  may  not  pas- 
tors administer  it  also  in  another,  when  need  so 
requireth  ?  "  Ainsworth  replies  :  ^  "A  Christian 
joineth  himself  to  a  flock  where  the  pastor  feedeth 
them,"  when  he  comes  among  them.  Show  you 
a  like  warrant  for  elderships  to  do  the  work  in  other 
elderships  and  churches.      Hooker,  in  his  Survey, 


MINISTERS.  255 

says  *  a  pastor  only  of  one  flock  can  do  no  pastoral 
acts  (referring  to  seals,  &c.)  in  another :  "  Those 
whom  a  pastor  cannot  judge  over,  over  them  he 
can  exercise  no  pastoral  act."  Nathaniel  Mather 
published  a  Disquisition  on  purpose  to  prove  the 
negative  of  this  question.  .  In  his  Epistle  to  the 
Reader,  he  says  a  minister  is  to  feed  the  flock  over 
which  the  Holy  Ghost  has  made  him  overseer; 
otherwise  we  shall  justify  the  conduct  of  those  who 
call  lay  brethren  to  administer  it.  "  If  he  does  it 
as  pastor,  then  he  does  it  as  pastor  of  his  own 
church,  and  then  one  church  may  make  a  pastor 
for  another."  He  maintains*  that  a  pastor  may 
not  administer  seals  to  another  church,  though  the 
church  asks  it  and  he  consents.  This  principle,  he 
claims,  leads  churches  to  furnish  themselves  with 
pastors,  which  if  they  are  too  poor  to  do,  their  sis- 
ter-churches should  give  them  pecuniary  help,  not 
officers.  He  claims  the  majority  of  Congrega- 
tionalists  with  him.  His  illustrious  relatives,  it 
seems,  espoused  the  other  side  of  the  question. 
The  same  is  true  of  the  modern  Congregationalists 
generally.  They  hold  that  administering  the  seals 
is  not  an  act  of  ministerial  power ;  having  gone 
over  to  the  democratic  doctrine  so  dreaded  by  the 
fathers.  Cotton  Mather  says  ^  the  Platform  denies 
not  the  power  of  a  minister  to  administer  commu- 
nion in  another  church  besides  his  own.  Mr.  Phil- 
lips of  Watertown  did  administer  it  to  Mr.  Wilson's 
of  Boston  when  he  was  gone  to  England.  Ances- 
tus  thus  requested  Polycarpus  to  administer  it. 
Cambridge   Association^    early   decided  that  they 


256  MINISTERS. 

might  so  administer  it,  by  the  request  of  the  church. 
In  his  Ratio  Disciplinse,^  he  says  of  this  question: 
"  It  has  been  very  publicly  and  practically  answered 
that  1  hey  may."  He  claims  Dr.  Goodwin,  Dr.  Owen, 
and  the  first  fathers  of  New  England,  as  with  him. 
The  opinion  of  Samuel  Mather  may  be  clearly  in- 
ferred from  his  principle,  that  a  church  may  lawfully 
appoint  a  lay  brother-to  administer  them.  It  is  on 
this  principle  alone,  the  consent  of  the  church,  that 
dismissed  ministers  and  evangelists  now  administer 
seals.  We  may  see,  then,  that  the  administration 
of  the  Lord's  Supper  by  ecclesiastical  and  volun- 
tary assemblies  is  out  of  order.  It  should  be  wholly 
under  the  direction  of  the  church  where  they  as- 
semble. Increase  Mather  maintains  this  side  of 
the  question  in  his  Vindication,®  argues  that  they 
may  administer  on  invitation,  and  quotes  Cam- 
bridge Platform,  chap.  xv.  sect.  4  ;  Norton's  Answer 
to  Appolinius;  Shepard  and  AUin's  Answer  to 
Ball ;  Richard  Mather,  Cotton,  and  Goodwin.  Cot- 
ton,^^  however,  did  not  baptize  his  child  at  sea, 
because  he  believed  that  a  minister  could  not  law- 
fully administer  seals  out  of  his  own  congregation  ; 
and  also  that  they  should  be  administered  in  an 
organized  church.  See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  217, 
236.  —  See  Lord's  Supper,  may  it  he  administered 
by  any  but  ordained  ministers?  Officers;  Seals; 
Platform,  Cambridge. 


^  Ans.  78.  2  In  Han.  i.  331,  332.  ^  lb.  344,  345.  ■*  Part  ii.  61, 
63.  ^  Pages  50,  70,  75.  ^  Magnalia,  ii.  204.  '  lb.  205.  »  Pages 
134—136.    »  Pages  112—117.     *^  Winthrop's  Journal,  i.  110. 


MINISTERS.  257 

MINISTERS  should  give  themselves  wholly  to 
their  tvork.  —  Thomas  Goodwin  shows  at  length  ^ 
that  God  thought  fit  to  make  it  the  sole  business 
of  men,  enabled  with  the  greatest  gifts  that  were 
ever  poured  out  upon  men,  to  attend  and  look  to  the 
bringing  up  of  his  children,  and  to  give  themselves 
continually  to  the  word  and  prayer.  Every  private 
member  is  to  advance  his  brother;  but  it  is  the 
minister's  work  to  do  it.  So  Bradshaw,  in  his 
English  Puritanism.'^  Hooker,  in  his  Survey,^  shows 
that  he  must  take  up  no  employment  but  what  fits 
him  for  his  main  work,  and  not  entangle  himself. 
Acts  vi.  2 — 4.  Cotton  Mather,*  in  his  Sermon  to  a 
Part  of  the  Persons  engaged  in  a  Just  War  against 
the  Northern  and  Eastern  Savages,  apologizes  for 
his  lack  of  preparation,  and  says :  "  Nothing  is 
more  fulsome  and  nauseous  than  for  a  preacher  to 
value  himself  on  such  a  crime  as  his  not  spending 
much  time  in  study."  —  See  next  two  articles. 

'  Ch.  Gov.  265—272.  ^  in  Neal,  i.  249.  =  Part  ii.  27.  "  Epis- 
tle Dedicatory. 

MINISTERS  should  not  be  magistrates.  —  Hooker, 
in  his  Survey,*  says  :  "  The  minister  should  give  the 
whole  man  to  the  work  ;  hence  it  is  unlawful  for 
him  to  be  a  magistrate,  for  he  has  not  the  ability 
to  discharge  the  duties  of  both  offices."  Jacob's 
Church  Confession  (art.  xxiv.)^  says  :  "  We  believe 
that  joining  of  pastoral  ministry  and  magistracy 
together  in  one  person  is  simply  unlawful,  and  con- 
trary to  the  text  of  the  New  Testament."  To  the 
same  effect  they  profess  in  art.  xxvii.  Lord  Brooke, 
22* 


258  MINISTERS. 

in  his  Discourse  on  Episcopacy  ^  comes  out  largely 
on  the  evils  of  this  practice,  in  the  case  of  the  lords 
bishops  of  England.  Bradshavv,  in  his  English 
Puritanism,^  says :  "  No  pastor  ought  to  exercise 
or  accept  of  any  civil  jurisdiction,  .  .  .  but  ought  to 
be  wholly  employed  in  spiritual  offices  and  duties." 
Cartwright,  in  his  Reply  to  Whitgifl,^  says  that  a 
minister  may  not  have  a  civil  office.  He  may  not 
so  much  as  be  diverted  to  bury  his  father,  nor  rule 
to  divide  an  inheritance.  So,  too,  argue  the  over- 
seers, &c.  of  the  English  Church  at  Amsterdam.^ 
Increase  Nowel  resigned  his  ruling  eldership  in 
Charlestown,  because  it  was  decided  that  it  was 
inconsistent  with  his  holding  the  magistracy.'^ 

iPart  ii.  26.  ^  in  Han.  i.  301,  302.  =*  i^,.  us,  119.  -» j^ 
Neal's  Puritans,  i.  249.  =  Page  206.  ^  Apology,  37—61.  '  Eliot, 
Biog.  Diet.  343. 

MINISTERS,  maintenance  of.  —  Goodwin  de- 
votes the  fourth  chapter  of  his  seventh  book  on 
Church  Government  to  this  subject.  He  defends 
their  right  to  it  on  the  principles  of  common  justice; 
pleads  that  it  should  be  ample  because  of  the  ne- 
cessary expenses  ;  because  it  is  the  labor  of  the 
mind,  which  spends  the  best  spirits,  and  preys  upon 
the  vitals;  their  education  is  long  and  expensive; 
and  it  brings  the  greatest  of  all  blessings.  He  shows 
tnat  it  should  be  a  fixed  stipend,  mutually  agreed 
upon,  and  that  the  people  have  no  right  to  dictate 
alone  what  to  give  (yet  he  argues  for  raising  it  by 
voluntary  contribution)  ;  and  he  shows  abundantly, 
that  it  is  not  a'  matter  of  courtesy,  but  a  minister's 


MINISTERS.  259 

right.  The  Confession  of  Jacob's  Church,  art. 
xxvi./  maintains  that  voluntary  tithing  is  not  unlaw- 
ful, but  that  it  is  better  that  it  should  be  by  volun- 
tary contribution,  by  every  one  as  God  has  prospered 
him.  Rathband^  asserted,  that,  in  New  England, 
ministers  were  in  the  habit  of  requiring  a  stipulated 
salary,  else  they  would  not  preach.  Welde  denies 
the  charge,  and  says  our  ministers'  maintenance 
must  be  honorable ;  not  as  alms  and  coveting,  but 
as  debt  and  duty.  But  for  settled  and  stinted 
maintenance  there  is  nothing  done  that  way,  except 
from  year  to  year.  The  Massachusetts  colony  laws 
in  1651  enacted  that  every  inhabitant  shall  contri- 
bute to  all  charges  in  church  and  commonwealth, 
and  provides  that  they  may  be  compelled  thereto 
by  assessment  and  distress,  and  strengthened  the 
same  in  1654  and  1660.  The  Massachusetts  Pro- 
vince laws  in  1692,  and  the  Plymouth  Colony  laws 
in  1657,  provide  for  the  support  of  ministers  by  law. 
Hooker,  in  his  Survey,'  ^fter  asserting  that  he  must 
give  himself  wholly  to  his  work,  adds :  "  They 
should  provide  for  him  and  his  family,  not  as  a 
matter  of  liberty  or  courtesy,  but  of  justice.  He 
asserts  *  that  it  cannot  be  raised  out  of  a  coiitribu- 
tion  to  it  and  the  poor ;  because  one  is  a  matter  of 
mercy,  the  other  of  justice.  If  a  member  fail  to 
support,  it  is  a  breach  of  a  known  rule  of  duty. 
The  church  determine  how  it  is  to  be  raised,  and 
the  deacons  see  to  the  execution  of  it.  Isaac  Chaun- 
cy,  in  his  Divine  Institution  of  Congregational 
Churches,*  shows  that  Christ  sent  not  his  ministers 
without  scrip,  as  common  beggars,  but  there  was 


260  MINISTERS. 

moral  justice  that  they  should  b'e  remembered  by 
the  people.  The  Apology  of  the  Overseers,  &c.  of 
the  English  Church  at  Amsterdam  ^  argues,  that  they 
should  be  maintained  by  voluntary  contributions. 
Eaton  and  Taylor '  argue  that  such  a  contribution 
should  be  taken  every  Lord's  day.  Increase  Ma- 
ther, in  his  treatise  concerning  the  Maintenance 
due  to  those  who  Preach  the  Gospel,  comes  to 
these  conclusions :  An  honorable  maintenance  is 
due  them  ;  the  reformed  churches  have  many  of 
them  been  faulty  in  this  matter ;  there  is  something 
due  to  God  out  of  every  man's  estate,  and  the  tenth 
of  his  income  is  the  least  that  may  be  supposed  ; 
tithes  are  not,  by  the  divine  law,  due  to  ministers 
of  the  gospel,  but  the  surplus  should  be  applied  to 
other  benevolent  objects.  Mitchell,  in  his  Guide, 
178—210;  Upham,  Rat.  Dis.  109;  and  Punchard, 
View,  188 — 190,  treat  of  this  subject  in  its  modern 
bearings  and  usages. 

^  In  Han.  i.  301.  *  lb.  ii.  333.  »  Part  ii.  27.  <  lb.  30,  31. 
*  Page  138.     «  Pages  37—61.     '  Defence,  60. 

MINISTERS,  refusing  to  support,  disciplinable. 
—  Mitchell  *  shows  this  on  the  ground  that  it  is 
covetousnessj  injustice,  and  disobedience  to  Christ,  and 
betrays  such  indifference  to  the  gospel  as  is  not  far 
from  denying  the  faith.  —  See  preceding  article. 

^  Guide,  100. 

MINISTERS  set  apart  to  the  work,  and  to  preach 
to  those  ivithout. — ^^ Goodwin^  shows  this,  though 
they  have  no  power  to  judge  those  that  are  without 


MINORITIES.  261 

The  Brownists  held  a  minister's  whole  duty  to  be 
to  take  care  of  the  church. 

1  Ch.  Gov.  310—313. 

For  the  whole  subject  of  ministers,  see  also  El- 
der, Election,  Installation,  Officer,  Ordina- 
tion, Pastor,  Preach,  Teacher. 

MINISTRY,  a  learned  and  able,  to  be  provided  for, 
—  This  was  one  of  the  first  cares  of  the  New  Eng- 
land Planters.  Accordingly,  four  hundred  pounds 
were  voted  by  the  General  Court  in  1630  to  be- 
gin the  enterprise  of  establishing  Harvard  College. 
This,  considering  the  deep  poverty  of  these  Puri- 
tans, must  have  cost  a  great  sacrifice.  But,  as 
Cotton  Mather  says,  "  Without  such  provision  for 
a  sufficient  ministry,  the  churches  of  New  England 
must  have  been  less  than  a  business  of  one  age.'' 
Our  fathers  came  here  for  Christ  and  the  church, 
and  owe  their  prosperity  under  God  to  sowing 
bountifully  to  enable  their  ministers  to  be  work- 
men that  need  not  to  be  ashamed. —  See  this  matter 
wisely  stated  in  Mather's  Magnalia,  ii.  67. 

MINORITIES,  their  rights.  — TxxxmhuW  informs 
us  that  the  General  Court  of  Connecticut  called  a 
Council  .at  Hartford  in  1657 ;  but  the  minority 
would  not  accept  the  result,  because  the  council 
was  forced  upon  them  by  legislative  authority. 
Watts,  in  his  Foundation  of  a  Christian  Church,^ 
shows  that  the  majority  are  to  choose  the  minister, 
and  a  minority  should  sit  down  satisfied  unless  it 


262  NEW    ENGLAND. 

be  against  their  consciences;  in  which  case  they 
should  withdraw.  —  See  Majorities. 

»  Hist.  Conn.  i.  315.    ^  Works,  iii.  216. 

MISSIONARY  WORK.  —  In  Mourt's  Relation ' 
is  this  reflection,  "  Seeing  we  daily  pray  for  the  con- 
version of  the  heathen,  we  must  consider  whether 
there  be  not  some  ordinary  means  and  course  for 
us  to  take  to  convert  them  ;  or  whether  prayer  for 
them  be  only  referred  to  God's  extraordinary  work 
from  heaven."  He  presses  this  consideration,  as  a 
reason  for  removing  to  New  England.  Dr.  Ware, 
in  his  History  of  the  Old  North  and  New  Brick 
Churches,  Boston,  asserts  ^  that  one  of  them  in 
1726  contributed  £60  for  the  propagation  of  the 
gospel.  Robinson  and  Owen,  and  their  coadjutors, 
just  as  distinctly  recognize  the  obligation  of  aggres- 
sive missionary  movements  as  do  Worcester  and 
Evarts,  and  the  Missionary  Boards  of  the  present 
day. 

*  In  Hist.  See.  Col.  series  ii.  vol.  ix.  67.    '"^  Page  60. 

NEGATIVE    VOTE.  —  See    Churches    begun 
tvithout  officers ;  Pastor,  has  he  a  negative  vote  7 

NEW  ENGLAND,  tribute  to  first  settlers  of,  — 
The  authors  of  the  Apologetical  Narrative  in  the 
Westminster  Assembly,  spealdng  of  their  own  helps 
TO  understand  the  true  system  of  church  govern- 
ment, say ; '  "  Last  of  all,  we  have  had  the  example 
of  the  ways  and  practices  (and  those  improved  to 
a  better  edition  and  greater  refinement  by  all  the 


NONCONFORMITY.  263 

forementioned  helps)  of  those  multitudes  of  godly 
men  of  our  own  nation,  to  the  number  almost  of 
another  nation  ;  and  among  them  some  as  holy  and 
judicious  as  this  kingdom  hath  had,  whose  sincerity 
in  this  way  hath  been  testified  by  the  greatest  un- 
dertaking, but  that  of  our  father  Abraham  out  of 
his  own  country,  and  his  seed  after  him ;  a  trans- 
planting themselves  many  thousand  miles  into  the 
wilderness,  merely  to  worship  God  with  more  puri- 
ty; "  —  no  mean  praise  to  come  from  the  greatest 
lights  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

*  In  Han.  ii.  223. 

NON-COMMUNION,  grounds  for.  —  Goodwin 
shows  *  that  this  should  be  only  for  such  sins  as 
render  the  individuals  of  the  church  rejected,  worthy 
of  excommunication. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  238. 

NONCONFORMISTS,  Independents  among  them 
icere  for  universal  toleration.  —  Neal  ^  shows  that 
this  was  their  wish  in  1662,  after  the  Restoration ; 
while  the  Presbyterians  objected  to  including  the 
Papists,  and  thereby  defeated  the  whole  object. — 
See  Toleration. 

'  Puritans,  ii.  247. 

NONCONFORMITY,  reasons  for.  —  A  good  ac- 
count of  these  is  given  in  Neal's  History  of  the 
Puritans,  vol.  i.  chap.  4.  He  gives  ^  an  abstract  of 
them,  handed  in  by  the  ministers  who  first  refused 
subscription,  entitled,  Reasons  grounded  upon  the 


264  NONCONFORMITY. 

Scriptures,  whereby  we  are  Persuaded  not  to  admit 
the  Outward  Apparel  and  Ministering  Garments 
of  the  Pope's  Church;  as,  1.  "Our  Saviour  says: 
Take  heed  that  ye  contemn  not  one  of  these  little 
ones."  They  show  that  conforming  here  may  lead 
these  to  idolatry,  and  thus  wound  their  weak  con- 
sciences. 2.  "  We  may  not  do  any  thing  that  is 
repugnant  to  Christian  liberty,  nor  maintain  an  opi- 
nion of  holiness  where  none  is,  nor  consent  to  idola- 
try, nor  deny  the  truth."  They  show  many  other 
evil  things  which  they  should  do  by  conforming  to 
the  habits.  3.  They  vindicate  their  course  by  the 
testimony  of  the  fathers.  The  Letter  of  some  Aged 
Non-conforming  Ministers  touching  the  Reasons  of 
their  Practice,*  gives,  in  substance,  the  following : 
They  do  not  like  the  Prayer-book ;  Christ  gave  no 
authority  to  impose  such  a  book  on  us ;  much  of 
it  is  taken  from  the  Mass-book  ;  it  is  faulty  in  form  ; 
requires  things  not  true  nor  good,  as  holy  days, 
baptismal  regeneration,  the  funeral  service,  sending 
all  the  baptized  to  heaven,  &c.;  it  decrees  human 
traditions,  the  cross  in  baptism,  kneeling  at  the 
sacrament,  &:c.  In  short,  they  adduce  almost  all 
the  ar2:uments  of  dissenters  in  a  condensed  form. — 
See  Habits,  Ceremonies. 

1  lb.  99.     2  Pages  7—23. 

NONCONFORMITY,  obstacles  to.  —  Prince  ^  in- 
forms us  that  not  more  than  one  in  forty  of  the 
Catholics  refused  to  conform  in  Elizabeth's  reign, 
BO  that  the  Puritans  had  to  contend  not  only 
against  the  ceremonies,  but  also  against  disguised 


OATH.  265 

Papists.  The  preface  to  the  History  of  Noncon- 
formity (attributed  to  Neal),  after  stating  other  per- 
secutions of  non-conforming  ministers,  says:  "  Are 
they  willing  to  lay  down  and  live  peaceably  among 
their  neighbors?  They  shall  not  so  much  as  have 
liberty  to  do  that  within  five  miles  of  any  corpora- 
tion, unless  they  will  swear  never  to  endeavor  any 
alteration  in  church  government."  —  See  Persecu- 
tion ;  Toleration. 

'  Chronology,  228. 

OATH,  mode  of  taking.  —  Increase  Mather,  in  his 
Discourse  on  Common  Prayer,  Worship,  and  Kiss- 
ing the  Book  in  Swearing,*  maintains  that  it  is  un- 
scriptural  to  kiss  the  book,  the  Scripture  form  being 
with  uplifted  hand ;  that  it  is  symbolizing  with 
Popish  idolatries.  The  Papists  say:  So  help  me 
God  and  these  holy  evangelists.  Parens  says :  It 
is  Popish  superstition  in  swearing  to  touch  the 
Gospels  with  the  finger.  Burroughs,  Voetius,  and 
Thomas  Goodwin  are  cited,  condemning  the  prac- 
tice as  idolatrous.  Rev.  S.  Willard,  on  the  Cere- 
mony of  Laying  the  Hand  on  the  Bible  in  Swear- 
ing, says :  ^  "  Whatever  is  sworn  by  is  not  a  medium., 
but  an  object,  of  worship."  It  is  in  the  oath  of 
supremacy  "  an  invocation  to  God,  and  swearing 
by  the  contents  of  the  book."'  In  ib..  Epistle  to 
the  Reader  by  M.  I.  (probably  Increase  Mather), 
Goodwin,  Nye,  and  Burroughs  are  quoted  as  op- 
posed to  this  rite.  Kissing  in  a  religious  way  is  a 
gesture  of  adoration. 

»  Pages  39—43.     »  Page  6.    =»  Ib.  6. 
23 


266  OFFICERS. 

For  the  general  subject  of  Oaths,  see  Savoy  Con- 
fession, art.  xxiii.  It  may  be  found  in  Upham's 
Rat.  Dis.  271,  and  also  bound  with  the  Cambridge 
Platform,  edition  of  1808  ;  the  Confession  being 
published  in  1812,  also  in  various  other  works. 

OFFENCES.  —  Hooker  ^  says  that  private  ones 
should  be  covered  as  far  as  possible,  and  healed. — 
See  Discipline. 

*  Survey,  part  iii.  34. 

OFFERINGS.  —  See  Gifts  ;  Collections. 

OFFICE  does  7iot  reside  in  electors. —  Owen,  in 
his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  iv.^  shows  that 
election  only  gives  the  power  of  office  as  Christ 
directs,  but  does  not  transmit  power  from  the  elect- 
ors to  the  elected. 

*  In  Works,  xx.  424. 

OFFICER,  mai/  a  church  call  one  of  another  church 
occasionally  to  pr£side  over  them  ?  —  Goodwin  * 
seems  tacitly  to  admit  that  they  may,  though  he 
shows  that  it  is  by  virtue  of  the  special  call  of  the 
church,  and  not  of  his  office  in  the  other  church. — • 
See  Ministers,  may  they  administer  seals,  SfC»  ? 

»  Ch.  Gov.  232. 

• 

OFFICERS,  church;  what  they  are.  —  Burton,  in 
his  Rejoinder  to  Prynne's  Full  Reply ,^  makes  them 
to  be  pastors,  teachers,  ruling  elders,  and  deacons. 
So,  too,  the  Leyden  Church,'  Lord  Brooke,'  the  In- 


OFFICERS.  267 

dependents  in  the  Westminster  Assembly,*  the  Pro- 
posers to  Parliament  for  gathering  Independent 
Churches,*  the  principal  divines  among  the  first 
settlers  of  New  England.^  Widows  were  added  to 
these  by  Thomas  Goodwin,^  and  afterward  by  other 
Congregational  writers.  (See  these  several  officers 
under  their  own  appropriate  heads.)  The  Congre- 
gational Union  of  England  and  Wales  ^  believe 
that  they  are  only  bishops  and  deacons,  and  with 
this  agree  the  present  general  belief  and  practice. 
President  Stiles  ^  says :  "  Several  churches,  in  com- 
pliance with  the  sentiments  of  their  pastors,  had 
ruling  and  teaching  elders  at  first ;  yet  they  at 
length  disused  the  ruling  elder;  and  the  teaching 
elder,  as  distinct  from  pastor,  is  now  dropped."  Dr. 
Dwight  ^°  says  :  "  Whatever  church  officers  the 
Scriptures  have  established,  as  standing  officers, 
are  appointed  by  God  himself:  ...  all  others  are  of 
human  institution." 

1  Page  4.  ^  In  Punchard's  Hist.  362.  ^  Discourse  on  Episco- 
pacy, in  Han.  ii.  127.  "  lb.  224.  *  lb.  iii.  248.  «  Trumbull's 
Hist.  Conn.  i.  295.  '  Catechism,  28.  «  In  Han.  iii.  600.  ^  Conv. 
Scrm.  64.     ^^  Works,  Serm.  cl. 

OFFICERS,  church ;  their  office  and  qualifications. 
Nathaniel  Mather,  in  his  Disquisition,^  says,  to  be 
an  officer  in  a  church  is  to  be  Christ's  substitute. 
It  is  not  an  indelible  office-power,  imparted  to  a 
man,  go  where  he  will;  but  is  a  spiritual  relation, 
to  which  the  institution  of  Christ  gives  being;  and 
does  not  extend  to  those  over  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  has  not  made  him  overseer.  He  shows  ^  that 
churches  may  be  without  officers,  but  officers  can- 


268  OFFICERS. 

not  be  without  churches.  The  Vindication  of  the 
Preacher  Sent'  maintains  that  some  gifted  unor- 
dained  men  are  gospel  preachers ;  and  that  officers 
sustain  not  a  relation  as  officers  to  the  universal 
church.  The  New  England  elders,  in  their  Answer 
to  the  Nine  Positions,'*  say :  "  The  office  is  founded 
in  the  relation  between  the  church  and  the  officer ; 
wherefore  take  away  the  relation,  and  the  office 
ceaseth."  Bradshaw,  in  his  English  Puritanism,* 
asserts  "  that  ecclesiastical  officers  or  ministers  in 
one  church  ought  not  to  bear  any*  ecclesiastical 
office  in  another."  The  True  Description  of  the 
Visible  Church,  published  in  1589,^  says  a  pastor 
should  be  "  apt  to  teach,"  and  watchful  over  the 
flock ;  a  doctor  apt  to  teach,  to  edify ;  the  elders 
should  have  wisdom,  judgment,  and  should  be  able 
to  prevent  and  redress  evil.  Lord  Brooke,  in  his 
Discourse  on  Episcopacy ,''  asserts  that  it  is  not  in 
the  power  of  officers  to  decide  cases  when  the 
church  is  together.  Why  tell  it  to  the  church,  if 
the  officers  are  to  decide  ?  "  All  officers  vail  bonnet 
when  the  party  giving  power  is  present."  Good- 
win^ maintains  that  he  carries  with  him  the  power 
of  order,  as  of  a  minister  to  preach  (i.e.  by  autho- 
rity), but  not  a  power  of  jurisdiction,  which  ceases 
when  and  where  his  official  relation  to  a  particu- 
lar church  ceases.  Cambridge  Platform  ^  says  : 
"  Church  officers  are  officers  to  one  church  even 
that  particular  church  over  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
has  made  them  overseers."  A  council  at  Concord, 
in  1637,'°  decided  that  ministers,  come  from  Eng- 
land, were  no  ministers  till  they  were  called  to  an- 


i 


OFFICERS.  269 

other  church,  though  they  were  ministers  before  they 
were  solemnly  ordained.  See  Suppressed  Directory 
of  the  Early  Nonconformists,  in  Neal,  ii.  440 ;  also 
Goodwin,  Church  Government,  book  vi.  282 — 290. 
—  See  Ministers,  is  their  character  indelible  ?  ma?/ 
they  administer  seals,  S^c.  ?  Officers  limited  to  those 
qualified. 

1  Pages  3,  4.  ^  Page  7.  ^  In  Han.  i.  357.  *  lb.  ii.  29.  *  Neal's 
Puritans,  i.  248.  « In  Han.  i.  30.  '  lb.  ii.  128.  '  Ch.  Gov.  230. 
»  Chap.  ix.  sect.  G.     '"  Winthrop,  i.  217. 

OFFICERS  not  the  church.  —  Goodwin  *  says  ; 
"  They  are  never  called  the  church  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. The  officers  are  said  to  be  set  in  the 
church,  but  they  are  not  called  the  church."  He 
quotes  ^  from  Parker's  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  "  It  may 
be  denied  that  the  name  church  is  ever  in  the  Scrip- 
tures restrained  only  to  the  priests;"  and  he  shows 
from  Clemens  Romanus,  that  he  wrote  to  the 
church,  and  not  to  the  elders  as  such.  The  whole 
of  chap.  vii.  book  ii.  argues  that  the  elders  are  not 
the  church. 

'Ch.Gov.  66.     2  lb.  74. 

OFFICERS,  church,  chosen  by  the  people.  —  This 
is  everywhere  maintained  as  fundamental  to  Con- 
gregationalism. Mosheim  ^  affirms  unhesitatingly, 
"  that  the  people  w^ere  undoubtedly  the  first  in  au- 
thority ...  it  was  therefore  the  assembly  of  the 
people  that  chose  their  own  rulers  and  teachers." 
The  Desires  of  the  Independents  ^  has  this,  "  that 
godly,  able  ministers,  chosen  by  the  people,  exercise 

23* 


270  OFFICERS. 

their  ministry."  Bartlett's  Model '  has  a  "  brief 
view  for  choosing  officers  by  the  whole  church." 
The  sixth  of  the  Propositions  to  Parliannent^  is, 
"  that  every  congregation  .  .  .  have  full  and  free 
power  to  choose  their  own  officers."  Cotton's 
Keys,  37  ;  Cambridge  Platform,  chap.  viii.  sect. 
5,  6  ;  Wise's  Vindication,  50,  51 ;  Samuel  Mather's 
Apology,  35 — 50  ;  and  Davenport's  Apologetical 
Reply,  37,  all  maintain  and  defend  the  same  doc- 
trine. Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church, 
chap,  iv.*  shows  that  the  apostles  are  recorded  in 
Acts  xiv.  23  to  have  ordained  elders  in  every  city 
by  the  lifting  up  of  the  hands,  or  election  of  the  bre- 
thren, translated  as  it  is  by  force  of  law,  to  answer 
a  special  purpose.  He  ®  answers  specious  objec- 
tions to  the  choosing  of  them  by  the  people  (as  that 
they  are  incapable),  showing  that  they  are  not  pre- 
cluded from  taking  advice,  but  they  must  choose 
for  themselves.  Dr.  Bentley,  in  his  Description  of 
Salem,^  shows  that  Mr.  Nicholet  was  called  to 
Salem  by  a  vote  taken  in  the  congregation,  and 
not  in  the  church.  "  Governor  Leverett  and  others 
declared  their  disapprobation,  as  contrary  to  tho 
law  of  the  jurisdiction  and  the  usages  of  the  church." 
Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,^  asserts  that  "the 
churches  elect  their  own  officers."  Lord  Brooke, 
in  his  Discourse  on  Episcopacy,^  says  by  God's 
rule  the  officers'  election  is  to  be  by  the  people. 
See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  102--104  ;  Punchard's 
View,  57,  123,  134 ;  and  especially  Coleman's  Pri- 
mitive Church,  chap.  iv.  —  See  Pastors,  power  to 
elect,  in  the  church. 


1 


\ 


OFFICERS.  271 

>  In  Han.  i.  9.  «  In  ib.  iii.  44.  »  ib.  246.  *  lb.  247.  *  Works, 
XX.  415.  ^  Ib.  422.  'In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  vi.  263. 
•*  Ib.  series  iii.  vol.  iii.  64.     *  In  Han.  ii.  126. 


OFFICERS,  church,  chosen  for  life.  —  The  sixth 
of  the  Propositions  for  Reforming  the  English 
Churches  includes  this:^  "  Let  them  ordain  officers 
for  life,  and  not  for  one  year  only."  Their  rotation 
was  one  of  the  objections  of  the  exiles  to  the  Dutch 
churches.  —  See  Elders,  is  their  office  perpetual  ? 

1  In  Han.  ii.  578. 

OFFICERS  limited  to  those  qualified. —  Cambridge 
Platform  ^  says  they  should  be  first  tried  and  proved, 
in  respect  to  those  gifts  and  virtues  which  the  Scrip- 
ture requireth  in  men  that  are  to  be  elected  to  such 
places;  specifying  their  qualifications,  and  naming 
the  Scripture  proofs.  Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a 
Gospel  Church,^  says  it  is  not  in  the  power  of  the 
church  to  communicate,  office-power  to  one  who 
has  not  the  required  qualifications.  After  repeat- 
ing substantially  the  above,^  he  maintains  that  it  is 
duty  to  withdraw  from  churches  that  have  deficient 
pastors,  and  join  to  others. —  See  Officers,  their 
office  and  qualifications. 

^  Chap.  viii.  sect.  3,  4.     ^  Works,  xx.  432.     ^  lb.  455. 

OFFICERS,  all  elected  ones  are  tndy  officers.  — 
Hooker'  shows  this  point,  and  adds:  "  The  Scribes 
and  Pharisees  sit  in  iNIoses'  chair.  They  must  there- 
fore be  heard,  though  unworthy."  He  evidently 
means  only  that  they" should  be  heard  while  con- 


272  OFFICERS. 

tinued  in  office,  and  we  continue  with  the  church , 
which  is  an  important  but  often  neglected  truth. 

'  Survey,  part  ii.  45. 

OFFICERS,  God^s  gift,  and  not  to  be  multiplied. — 
Goodwin  ^  shows  this  most  conclusively,  making  it 
appear  that  to  appoint  officers  in  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  which  Christ  has  not  appointed,  is  to  usurp 
his  authority.  He  tells  us,  in  his  word,  what  offi- 
cers he  has  set  in  the  churches,  and  requires  (1  Tim. 
vi.  14)  that  his  commandment  be  kept  unrebukable 
till  the  appearing  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Cam- 
bridge Platform  says  :  ^  "  The  instituting  of  all  these 
officers  in  the  church  is  the  work  of  God  himself ; 
.  .  .  and  therefore  such  officers  as  he  hath  not  ap- 
pointed are  altogether  unlawful  to  be  placed  in  the 
church,  or  to  be  retained  therein."  Hooker^  shows 
that  there  should  be  no  more  officers  than  are  ap- 
pointed by  Christ.  "  These  are  from  heaven."  — 
See  Church,  officers  of;.  Committees,  church; 
Standing  Committees. 

*  Ch.  Gov.  267—269.     ^  Chap.  vii.  sect.  6.    ^  Survey,  part  ii.  4. 

OFFICERS  necessary  because  of  God^s  appoint- 
ment.—  Goodwin^  shows  this  in  a  masterly  argu- 
ment, setting  at  nought  the  wisdom  of  those  who 
would  have  no  pastors ;  officers  which  God  has  set 
in  the  churche.s. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  264—26^. 

OFFICERS,  may  they  be  deposed  for  sins  not  de- 
serving of  excommunication  ?  —  Goodwin  ^  discusses 


ORDINANCES.  273 

this  point  at  length,  and  concludes  in  the  negative: 
showing  that  the  Scriptures  require  them  to  be 
treated  "  with  peculiar  tenderness,"  whereas  the 
present  practice  is  to  treat  them  with  "  peculiar 
severity." 

*  Ch.  Gov.  book  vii.  chap.  10. 

OFFICERS,  servants  of  the  church.  —  Goodwin  * 
says:  "  It  is  necessary  that  there  should  be  many 
oflicers  in  every  church,  to  whom  the  exercise  of 
church  power  be  especially  committed,  though  the 
power  itself  be  wholly  in  the  church  itself,  whose 
servants  and  helpers  they  are,  1  Cor.  i.  24,  and  not 
lords  over  them."  —  See  Elders,  servants  of  the 
church, 

»  Ch.  Gov.  267. 

OFFICERS  abdicate  when  they  refuse  to  do  the 
duties  of  their  office.  —  Wise^  maintains  the  appli- 
cation of  this  as  a  general  rule  to  those  pastors 
who  refuse  to  call  the  church  together.  Goodwin,'^ 
speaking  of  the  delinquency  of  officers,  says:  "  Then 
doth  their  power  return  again  to  the  church,  from 
whence  they  first  received  it."  —  See  Ministers, 
people  may  do  their  work  for  them,  8fc.;  Govern- 
ment, civil,  Sfc;  particularly  quotations  from  Bridge 
and  Chief  Justice  Holt,  in  ib. 

'  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Espoused,  91.     ^  Catechism,  23. 

ORDINANCES,  perpetuity  of  in  the  churches.  — 
Goodwin  devotes  the  fifth  chapter  of  his  first  book 
to  demonstrating  this  doctrine  ;  proving  it  from  the 


274  ORDINATION. 

existence  of  the  ancient  churches  and  from  the  de- 
clarations of  the  Scriptures.  Bridge,  in  the  preface 
to  his  Vindication  of  Ordinances,  argues  the  sanc- 
tity of  the  Lord's  day  from  the  fact  that  religion 
flourishes  most  when  it  is  most  observed.  He 
shows  ^  that  ordinarily  men  are  converted  under 
the  public  ministry.  The  alleged  fact,  that  per- 
sons have  greater  enjoyment  in  private  devotions 
than  in  public  ordinances,  is  no  more  an  argument 
against  ordinances  than  it  is  against  taking  their 
daily  food,  because  they  may  enjoy  their  private 
devotions  more  than  their  ordinary  meals. 

1  Page  14. 

OPtDIISrATION,  what.  —  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his 
Divine  Institution  of  Congregational  Churches,* 
says:  Ordination,  in  the  Old  or  New  Testament, 
applied  to  men,  signifies  the  installing  in  the  office 
to  which  they  are  called.  In  the  places  where  our 
translators  thus  use  the  word,  there  is  not  the  least 
mention  of  the  imposition  of  hands,  though  the 
word  rendered  ordaining  signifies  the  uplifting  of 
the  hands,"  by  way  of  suffrage,  in  the  election 
of  officers.  Increase  Mather,  in  his  Sermon  at  the 
Ordination  of  Mr.  Appleton,^  says :  "  Mutual  elec- 
tion is  that  which  doth  essentiate  the  relation  of  a 
pastor  to  this  or  that  particular  chijrch."  Hall,  in 
his  Puritans  and  their  Principles,'  argues  that  to 
"  ordain  elders  means  simply  to  establish  them," 
and  has  reference  to  no  external  ceremony.  He 
demonstrates,  by  several  references  to  Greek  au- 
thors, that  the  word  rendered  ordained  in  Acts  xiv. 


ORDINATION.  275 

23  refers  to  the  election  of  the  people  by  the  lifting 
up  of  hands.  Declaration  of  Discipline  (probably 
Udal's),  published  in  1574,  says  in  the  table:  "  Or- 
dination is  a  solemn  investing  or  installing  into 
office."  The  point  is  discussed  in  ib.  page  66. 
Cambridge  Platform  says:*  "This  ordination 'we 
account  as  nothing  else  but  the  solemn  putting 
a  man  into  his  place  and  office  in  the  church,  to 
which  he  had  a  right  before  by  election."  The 
Congregational  Manual  says :  ^  "  Ordination  is  a 
public  consecration  of  a  man  to  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  an  admission  of  him  to  the  order  of  elders 
or  bishops,  and  a  solemn  putting  of  him  into  his 
place  and  office  as  pastor  of  the  church,  like  the 
installing  of  a  magistrate."  Dr.  Watts,  in  his 
Foundation  of  a  Christian  Church,®  shows  that 
there  is  no  instance  of  ordination  recorded  in  Scrip- 
ture, save  for  extraordinary  officers,  and  intimates 
that  it  is  doubtful  how  many  of  these  practices 
should  now  be  retained.  Hooker,  in  the  preface  to 
his  Survey,  says  :  "  Ordination  is  the  installing  of 
an  officer  into  office,  to  which  he  was  previously 
called."  —  See  Imposition  of  Hands  ;  Ordination, 
is  any  besides  election  indispensable  ?  by  presbytery, 

^  Page  68.  ^  in  his  Practical  Truths,  122.  ^  Page  305,  306, 
321.     ■»  Chap.  ix.  sect.  2.     ^  Page  29.     »  Works,  iii.  206. 

• 

ORDINATION  must  be  to  a  particular  church  by 
election.  —  This  was  maintained  by  Axton  in  the 
court  of  Archbishop  Parker.^  In  the  debates  in 
the  Westminster  Assembly  *  is  the  question,  whe- 
ther certain  ministers  in  London  may  not  be  ap- 


276  ORDINATION. 

pointed  to  ordain   others  jvre  fraternitatis.      'J'he. 
Independents  dissented,  unless  the  ordination  was 
attended  by  the  previous  election  of  some  church. 
It  is  asserted  ^  that  there  was  a  debate  in  the  same 
assembly,  "  whether  ordination  might  precede  elec- 
tion  to   a  particular  cure  or  charge."     Goodwin, 
Nye,  Bridge,  and   the   rest    of  the  -Independents, 
"  replied  to  the  arguments  from  the  ordination  of 
Timothy,  Titus,  and  Apollos,"  that  these  were  ex- 
traordinary officers ;  and  it  appeared  absurd  to  or- 
dain  an  officer  without  a  province  to  exercise  his 
office  in.     The  grand  difficulty  lay  here,  that  ordi- 
nation  without    election   to    a    particular    charge 
seemed   to   imply  a   conveyance    of    office-power, 
which,  in  their  opinion,  was  attended  with  the  diffi- 
culties of  a  lineal  succession.     The  same  doctrine 
is  advanced  in  the  Nonconformists'  Directory  in  the 
days  of  Queen  Elizabeth.'*     Hooker,  in  the  preface 
to  his  Survey,  says  :  "  There  ought  to  be  no  ordi- 
nation of  a  pastor  at  large,  i.e.  such  as  should  make 
him  a  pastor  without  a  people."     He  *  quotes  seve- 
ral authors  to  show  that  the  pastoral  office  is  con- 
stituted by  election.     He  also  shows  that  in  the 
beginning  the  people  chose  their  officers,  and  then 
presented  them  to  the  apostles  for  ordination.     The 
Declaration  of  Discipline   asserts  ^  that  "  ancient 
synods  made  a  decree,  that  no  man  should  be  or- 
dained an  elder  without  a  title,  that  is,  a  church." 
The  Congregational  Manual  proposes^  to  adhere 
to  these  ancient  usages,  except  in  the  case  of  mis- 
sionaries and  professors  in  colleges  and  theological 
seminaries.     Clemens  Romanus  *  says :  The  apos- 


ORDINATION.  277 

ties  ordained  officers  "  with  the  good  liking  and 
consent  of  the  church."  The  Savoy  Confession, 
on  the  Institution  of  Churches,  art.  xv.,'  says :  "  Or- 
dination alone,  without  election,  or  a  precedent 
consent  of  the  church,  .  .  .  doth  not  constitute  any 
person  an  officer,  or  consummate  office-power  unto 
him."  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his  Divine  Institution  of 
Congregational  Churches,**^  says  :  Christ  never  con- 
stituted such  a  ministry,  but  what  were  set  in  a 
particular  church  by  election.  The  apostles  were 
set  first  in  the  church  at  Jerusalem.  If  there  be  a 
catholic  visible  church,  there  should  be  a  catholic 
visible  pastor.  Increase  Mather,  in  his  Vindica- 
tion," shows  at  length  that  pastors  may  not  be 
ordained  except  to  particular  churches.  The  con- 
trary was  an  innovation  of  the  bishops.  Many 
ancient  councils  objected  against  it,  and  deemed  it 
null  and  void.  Such  an  officer  is  a  sinecure,  and 
his  particular  church  cannot  depose  him  from  his 
office.  Rev.  Stephen  Badger  was  ordained  a  mis- 
sionary at  Boston,  with  special  reference  to  the 
Indians  at  Natick ;  ^^  but  he  was  called  and  or- 
dained the  pastor  of  a  church  gathered  there.'^  Dr. 
Coleman  was  thus  ordained  in  London  for  Brattle- 
street  Church,  Boston,  in  1699;  but  this  excited 
opposition,  and  led  one  to  call  the  church  a  "  Pres- 
byterian brat."/'* — See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  13. — 
See  Evangelists. 

»  In  Neal's  Puritans,  1.  113.     =  lb.  494.     =^  lb.  ii.  8.     "*  lb.  Ap- 
pendix, 440,  441.     *  Part  ii.    40,   41.     « Page   39.      '  Page   29. 
"^  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  23.     *  In  Han.  iii.  547.     1°  Pages 
24 


278  ORDINATION. 

18, 19.  "  Pages  100—107.  ^-  Title  to  Dr.  Appleton's  Ordination 
Serm.  of  id.  '^  Do.  to  Dr.  Sewall's  Charge,  and  Mr.  Abbott's 
Kight  Hand  to  do.     '•*  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  125. 

ORDINATION  of  missionaries.  —  See  Evange- 
lists ;  also  the  next  preceding  arricle ;  also  Upham's 
Rat.  Dis.  86—94. 

The  following  has  been  kindly  furnished  by  Rev. 
Dr.  Anderson,  Sec.  A.  B.  C.  P\  M.,  for  the  stereo- 
type edition  of  this  work  :  — 

"  The  present  usage  in  ordaining  missionaries  is 
not  described  with  entire  accuracy  by  Prof.  Upham 
in  his  Ratio  Disciplinse.  At  first,  and  for  some 
time,  the  Prudential  Committee  were  accustomed 
to  call  the  ordaining  council.  But,  for  many  years 
past,  the  whole  matter  of  ordination  has  been  left 
with  the  candidate  to  arrange  with  the  church  to 
which  he  belongs,  or  with  some  other  church  to 
which  he  sustains  a  providential  relation.  The 
letters-missive  are  issued  in  the  name  of  the  church, 
inviting  sister-churches  to  come,  with  their  pastors, 
and  ordain  the  candidate,  if  they  think  proper,  as  a 
missionary  to  the  heathen.  Where  circumstances 
have  been  peculiar,  the  candidate  has  himself  some- 
times communicated  his  wishes,  by  letter,  to  certain 
pastors  and  churches,  and  asked  them  to  assemble 
and  ordain  him,  in  case  they  saw  no  objection.  I 
am  speaking  of  such  as  are  ordained  Congrega- 
tionally.  The  ordination  of  Presbytefian  mission- 
aries is  of  course  by  their  Presbyteries."  * 

*  The  communication  from  -which  the  above  was  taken  was 
expected  in  season  for  a  correction  of  the  article  Evangelists  not 
to  be  ordained  for  the  conversio7i  of  infidels.    It  seems  that  this 


ORDINATION.  279 

ORDINATION  by  direct  succession  unnecessary.  — 
Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  Schism/  inquires  why  in 
doctrine  we  should  succeed  the  persecuted  woman, 
while  in  office  we  must  succeed  the  persecuting 
beast.  In  his  Review  of  the  same,^  he  maintains 
that  there  should  be  a  succession  through  the  elders 
of  the  same  church,  where  there  are  any,  but  not 
back  through  Rome.  Hopkins'^  argues  for  direct 
succession,  and  maintains,  very  inconclusively,  that 
every  minister  may  consider  himself  in  direct  suc- 
cession, in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary. 
See  Ordination  by  ministers  ;  by  the  people, 

^  In  Han.  iii.  44ir    « lb.  450.     »  System,  ii.  233—240. 

article  left  the  impression  on  the  mind  of  Dr.  A.  that  the  authori- 
ties quoted  would  not  allow  missionaries  the  right  of  administering 
seals,  gathering  churches,  &c.,  till  they  Avere  actually  constituted 
pastors  of  mission-churches.  Now,  Dr.  Owen,  in  the  immediate 
context  to  the  quotation  cited,  expressly  recognizes  their  right  to 
this,  founded  on  Acts  xiii.  and  other  passages.  The  simple  ques- 
tion at  issue  is  whether  they  should  receive  such  ordination  as  to 
constitute  them  a  distinct  class  of  church  officers  ?  They  surely 
should  possess  all  the  authority  which  Barnabas  had  after  he  and 
Paul  were  separated  to  the  work,  unless  the  laying  on  of  hands 
had  connection  with  the  imparting  of  miraculous  gifts,  (see  Impo- 
sition OF  Hands,  is  it  necessary  ?)  and  all  which  Luke  had  after  that 
he  was  phosen  (x^ipoTOVT]d£ig,  2  Cor.  viii.  19)  or  ordained  of  the 
churches  to  travel  with  Paul  and  Timothy.  This  seems  to  be  very 
nearly  imitated  in  our  present  missionary  ordinations,  according  to 
the  above  article.  The  object  of  the  author  is  simply  to  elicit 
inquiry  as  to  the  idea  of  office-power  conferred  on  evangelists  by 
ordination.  The  Congregational  Dictionary  is  designed  to  be  re- 
formatory  and  progressive  in  its  influence,  recognizing  the  Holy 
Scriptures  as  the  only  standard  of  authority.  It  is  not  appre- 
hended that  this  tends  to  any  revolutionanj  movements,  our 
churches  being  already  based  on  the  Roajc  of  Ages,  according  tf» 
the  divine  word. 


280  '    ORDINATION. 

ORDINATION  conveys  no  spiritual  power,  —  Dr. 
Price  *  says  of  the  Independents  in  the  Westminster 
•  Assembly :  "  They  were  distinguished  from  the 
Presbyterians  by  .  .  .  and  denying  the  communica- 
tion of  spiritual  power  in  ordination."  Hooker^ 
mainte^ins  that  Timothy  received  not  office-power, 
but  spiritual  gifts,  by  the  laying  on  of  Paul's  and 
the  presbytery's  hands.  He  is  exhorted  to  stir  up, 
not  his  office-power,  but  the  gift  that  was  in  him. 
Imposition  of  hands  did  not  add  to  his  office,  but 
only  confirmed  it.  —  See  Imposition  of  Hands. 

*  In  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  462,  note.     -  Survey,  part  ii.  55 — 59. 

ORDINATION,  is  a  council  necessary  to  ?  —  R. 
Mather  ^  says  :  "  It  is  thQ  practice,  in  ordaining  and 
deposing  ministers,  to  call  in  the  aid  of  other 
churches ;  but  it  is  not  lawful  nor  convenient  to  call 
in  such  assistance  (viz.  by  way  of  authority  or 
power  of  the  ministers  of  other  churches)."  Cotton' 
says,  the  Presbytery  of  that  church,  if  they  have 
one,  if  not  two  or  three  others  of  the  gravest  of  the 
brethren,  being  deputed  by  the  body,  ordain  him, 
with  imposition  of  hands.  He  says:^  "  Ordination 
is  a  work  of  church  power.  .  .  .  The  power  of  the 
keys  is  a  liberty  purchased  to  the  church  by  the  blood 
of  Christ,^^  and  should  not  be  parted  ivith  at  a  less 
price.  The  views  of  the  fathers  undoubtedly  were, 
that  a  council  was  very  desirable  for  advice,  and 
safety  from  impostors,  but  that  the  power  of  ordi- 
nation was  in  the  church.  —  See  Ordination  by  the 
people. 

>  Ch.  Gov.  and  cS  Cov.  41.     «  Way,  41.     ^  lb.  50. 


ORDINATION.  281 

ORDINATION,  none  besides  election  indispensable. 
Archbishop  Craiimer  took  this  ground  in  an  early 
period  of  the  English  Reformation.  He  says : ' 
"  He  that  is  appointed  a  bit^hop  or  a  priest  needeth 
no  consecration  by  the  Scriptures ;  for  election  or 
appointing  thereto  is  sufficient."  Cambridge  Plat- 
form ^  says :  "  The  essence  and  substance  of  the 
outward  call  of  an  ordinary  officer  doth  not  consist 
in  his  ordination,  but  in  his  voluntary  and  free  elec- 
tion by  the  church,  and  his  accepting  of  that  rela- 
tion. .  .  .  Ordination  doth  not  constitute  an  officer, 
nor  give  him  the  essentials  of  his  office.  The 
apostles  were  elders  without  imposition  of  hands 
by  men.  Paul  and  Barnabas  were  officers  before 
that  imposition  of  hands."  Owen,  in  his  Nature 
of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  iv.,^  shows  that  the 
elders  were  ordained  by  the  choosing  of  them  by 
the  people,  by  the  lifting  up  of  their  hands,  accord- 
ing to  the  Greek  of  Acts  xiv.  23.  He  maintains, 
however,'*  that  they  should  be  solemnly  set  apart; 
and  says  that  the  light  of  nature  proclaims  this,  as 
it  does  the  coronation  of  kings,  which  gives  them 
not  their  title,  but  proclaims  it.  At  an  ordaining 
council  at  Concord  in  1637,  it  was  decided,  that, 
upon  election,  ministers  were  such  before  they  were 
ordained.*  Isaac  Chauncy,  however,  held  to  the 
necessity  of  ordination.  He  says:^  "  The  consum- 
mation of  a  call  is  made  by  the  free  acceptance 
of  the  person  called;  but  this  doth  not  constitute 
a  person  in  the,  ministerial  office,  any  more  than  a 
private  contract  doth  constitute  man  and  wife." 
Increase  Mather,  in  his  Sermon  at  the  Ordination 

24* 


282  ORDINATION.    * 

of  Mr.  Appleton/  and  Mr.  Pemberton,  in  his  Dis- 
course at  the  Ordination  of  Mr.  Sewall,^  hold  the 
same  doctrine.  See  Samuel  Mather's  Apology- 
chap,  ii.  ;  Upham's  Rftt.  Dis.  Ill  ;  Robinson's 
Works,  iii.  39.  —  See  Calling  ;  Translation. 

*  In  Punchard's  Hist.  200.  ^  Chap.  ix.  sect.  2.  ^  "Works,  xx. 
115.  •*  lb.  424.  5  Winthrop,  i.  217.  « Divine  Inst.  Cong. 
Churches,  65.     '  In  his  Practical  Truths,  124.     ^  Page  3. 

ORDINATION  by  ministers.  —  Robinson,  in  his 
Justification,^  says :  "  We  acknowledge,  that,  in  the 
right  and  orderly  state  of  things,  no  ministers  are  to 
be  ordained  but  by  ministers.  ...  If  ordination  had 
been  so  prime  a  work,  Paul  would  have  tarried 
himself  in  Crete  to  have  ordained  elders  there,  and 
sent  Titus,  an  inferior  officer,  about  the  inferior 
work  of  preaching."  To  this  agrees  Congregational 
practice  everywhere.  Ministers  seem  the  proper 
persons  for  such  public  performances ;  but  when 
thiri  practice  is  perverted  to  mean  that  the  officiat- 
ing ministers  give  the  church  a  minister  or  withhold 
him  at  pleasure,  are  more  than  counsellors,  and 
control  more  than  their  own  acts,  then  it  is  time  for 
the  churches  to  stand  fast  in  their  liberty ;  as  they 
did  in  various  instances  in  the  early  settlement  of 
Massachusetts  and  Connecticut.  (See  two  preced- 
ing and  two  succeeding  articles.)  Dr.  Stiles*  says: 
"It  was  a  mistaken  notion  of  our  fathers,  that  the 
power  of  ordination  was  in  the  church  by  the 
elders;'*  (might  not  the  church  then  be  overruled 
in  their  choice  ?)  "  also  that,  where  there  are  no 
elders,  it  might  be  performed  by  delegated   breth- 


ORDINATION.'  283 

ren."  He  traces  all  through  the  bishops,  and  thus 
argues  a  lineal  succession  via  Rome.  Though  the 
bishops  did  not  intend  to  impart  to  presbyters  the 
power  of  ordaining,  yet  they  did  (by  unintentional 
contagion,  I  suppose!)  give  them  full  presbyterial 
powers.  "  Dead  flies ! "  Rev.  Joseph  Webb,  in 
his  Letter  to  Cotton  Mather,'  expresses  great  fears 
of  the  evils  growing  out  of  the  lay-ordinations. 
But,  in  the  Letter  of  the  Boston  Ministers  on  the 
Duty  of  the  Distressed  Churches,  they  scout  these 
fears,  saying:*  "They  will  have  none  owned  for 
ministers  of  Christ  but  such  as  Antichrist  has  or- 
dained for  him,  such  as  the  paw  of  the  beast  hath 
been  laid  upon,  that  they  pretend  succession  from." 
Barrowe,  in  his  Discovery  of  a  False  Church,* 
shows  that  to  make  ordination  pertain  to  ministers 
only,  is  a  "trick  to  stop"  a  real  election  by  the 
people,  and  make  it  really  depend  upon  the  classis, 
while  the  people  have  their  eyes  blinded  in  the 
matter. 

*  In  Han.  i.  215 ;  and  Punchard's  Hist.  333 ;  and  Works,  ii. 
430,  437.  *  Election  Serm.  59—64.  »  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  ii. 
vol.  ii.  132,  133.    •*  lb.  134.    ^  In  Han.  i.  47. 

ORDINATION  hy  presbytery.  —  Goodwin  says:* 
"  The  Scriptures  in  plain  terms  attribute  the  act  of 
ordination  to  a  presbytery,  i.e.  a  company  of  elders 
united  in  that  relation  "  (referring  to  the  elders  of 
one  particular  church).  His  definition,  how^ever, 
virtually  begs  the  question.  The  chapter  on  dis- 
cipline in  the  Savoy  Confession  says :  ^  "  The  way 
of  ordaining  officers  is,  .  .  .  after  their  election  by 


284    •  ORDINATION. 

the  suffrage  of  the  church,  to  set  them  apart  with 
fasting  and  prayer  and  imposition  of  hands  of  the 
eldership  of  the  church  ;  though,  if  there  be  no  im- 
position of  hands,  they  are  nevertheless  rightly 
constituted  ministers  of  Christ."  Barrowe,  in  his 
Refutation  of  Giffard,^  says  :  "  It  is  to  be  performed 
by  the  eldership  of  the  church,  if  there  be  one  in 
it;  if  not,  by  the  help  of  the  elders  of  some  other 
faithful  congregation."  Richard  Mather,  in  his  Re- 
ply to  Rathband,"^  says :  "  We  willingly  do  grant, 
that,  where  elders  are  not  wanting,  imposition  of 
hands  is  to  be  performed  by  the  elders."  So  say 
the  Independents  in  the  Westminister  Assembly.^ 
"  There  is  a  sufficient  presbytery  (for  ordination)  in 
every  congregation."  Cambridge  Platform^  says :  ^ 
"  In  such  churches  where  there  are  elders,  imposi 
tion  of  hands  in  ordination  is  to  be  performed  by 
those  elders."  It  was  thus  that  Mr.  Cotton  was 
installed  in  Boston.'^  Isaac  Chauncy  ^  argues,  that, 
as  "  the  elders  of  one  church  cannot  perform  an 
authoritative  act  in  another  church,"  therefore,  if 
ordination  is  to  be  by  elders  at  all,  it  should  be  by 
elders  of  the  same  church.  Increase  Mather  ^  main- 
tains that  it  is  one  of  the  fundamentals  of  Congre- 
gationalism, that  ordination  of  pastors  must  be  by 
the  approbation  of  neighbor-churches  or  elders.  He 
states  ^°  that  it  was  an  old  doctrine  in  New  Eng- 
land, that  a  church  which  has  no  elders  should 
desire  neighbor-churches  to  assist  in  ordination. 
He  supposes  lay-ordination  not  decent,  though 
valid,  because  no  imposition  of  hands  is  necessary, 
but  only  election.     Mr.  Pemberton,  in  his  Discourse 


I 


ORDINATION.  285 

at  the  Ordination  of  Mr.  Sewall,  maintains  "  that 
the  power  of  ordination  is  in  the  presbytery. —  See 
Imposition  of  Hands  ;  Installation. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  64.  »  In  Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  179.  »  In  Han.  i.  57. 
*Ib.  ii.  186.  *Ib.  511.  «  Chap.  ix.  sect.  3.  'Hubbard's  Hist, 
of  Mass.  188.  ^  Divine  Inst,  of  Cong.  Churches,  69.  '  Vindic.  of 
N.  Eng.  Churches,  8.     '"^  lb.  100.     "  Page  II. 

ORDINATION  hy  the  people.  —  Barrowe,  in  his 
Answer  to  Giffard/  says :  "  If  the  apostacy  be  so 
general  that  there  are  not  anywhere  to  be  found  any 
true  elders,  yet  then  hath  the  church  .  .  .  power  to 
ordain  their  ministers  by  the  most  fit  members  and 
means  they  have."  The  Confession  of  the  Low 
Country  Exiles,  art.  xxiii.,^  says :  '^  Every  Christian 
congregation  hath  power  and  commandment  to 
elect  and  ordain  their  own  ministry."  Ainsworth, 
in  his  Reply  to  Johnson,^  says:  "  That  ministers  of 
one  particular  church  should  ordain  elders  for  an- 
other church  is  more  unorderly  than  when  every 
church  ordaineth  them  itself."  Davenport,  in  his 
Power  of  Congregational  Churches,*  says :  "  Their 
ordination  of  officers,  by  deputing  some  out  of  their 
own  body  thereunto  ...  in  a  want  of  officers,  is  an 
act  of  this  power  of  the  keys  residing  in  them." 
Richard  Mather  and  W.  Tompson,  Answer  to 
Herle,*  say:  "  Where  elders  cannot  conveniently  be 
borrowed  from  any  other  church,  imposition  of 
hands  may  lawfully  be  performed  by  some  principal 
men  of  the  congregation,  though  they  be  not  elders 
by  office."  So  also  Mather's  Reply  to  Rutherford,^ 
Propositions  attributed  to  John   Cotton,^   and  the 


286  ORDINATION. 

Petition  of  the  Independents  in  the  Westminster 
Assembly.^  In  the  grand  debate  in  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly,^  "  the  Independents  maintained  the 
right  of  every  congregation  to  ordain  its  own 
officers;"  and  when  it  was  voted  "that  no  single 
congregation,  that  can  conveniently  associate,  as- 
sume to  itself  the  sole  right  of  ordination,"  Thomas 
Goodwin,  P.  Nye,  J.  Burroughs,  S.  Simpson,  W. 
Bridge,  W.  Greenhill,  and  W.  Carter  entered  their 
dissent.  Cambridge  Platform  ^^  maintains  the 
same  doctrine.  Hooker"  says:  "It  is  most  comely 
that  those  of  the  same  congregation  should  exer- 
cise it"  (ordination),  but  they  may  invite  others. 
He  ^^  reiterates  the  same  sentiment,  and  shows  that 
if  a  classis  is  composed  of  those  sent  by  churches, 
then  congregations  first  provided  ministers,  for  they 
did  not  first  receive  them  from  classes ;  and,  if  pres- 
byters first  made  a  bishop,  they  were  before  him, 
and  did  not  receive-  their  office  from  him.  Hutchin- 
son, in  his  History  of  Massachusetts,^^  says  :  "  The 
church  in  Charlestown  chose  Mr.  Wilson  for  their 
teacher,  and  ordained  him;"  and^*  "Mr.  Higgin- 
son  was  ordained  by  two  deacons  and  a  private 
brother  in  Salem,"  though  it  appears  that  they  had 
sent  for  a  delegation  from  Plymouth,  who  were  de- 
tained. Mr.  Hooke  was  ordained  at  Taunton  by  a 
schoolmaster  and  one  of  the  other  brethren.^^  There 
was  such  an  ordination,  in  1642,  in  Woburn.  A 
number  of  ministers  were  present ;  but "  the  people 
were  tenacious  of  their  right  to  ordain,  supposing 
that  yielding  it  might  lead  to  dependency,  and  so 
to  presbytery."  ^^     Another,  Israel  Chauncy's,  took 


ORDINATION.  287 

place  in  Stratford,  where,  Eliot  says,"  "  by  forgetful- 
ness  (I  rather  think  in  contempt  of  habits  and  cere- 
monies) the  elder  imposed  his  hand  with  a  leather 
mitten  upon  it."  Cotton  Mather,  in  his  Magnalia,^' 
represents  ordination  by  "  lay-brethren,  orderly  cho- 
sen by  the  church  thereunto,"  as  having,  in  his  time, 
gone  into  disuse.  Samuel  Mather,  in  his  Apology,*' 
shows  that  the  Bohemian  Churches  commenced  on 
this  (lay-ordination)  principle;  and^^  he  shows  that 
"even  a  famous  bishop  of  Salisbury"  held  it  in  his 
Exposition  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles.  He  argues 
the  point  at  length  and  very  conclusively;^*  and 
indeed  in  the  whole  of  his  second  chapter.  Watts, 
in  his  Foundation  of  a  Christian  Church,^^  shows 
that  popular  ordination  is  valid,  and  sometimes 
necessary,  but  not  often  expedient.  Davenport,  in 
his  Power  of  Congregational  Churches,-^  says :  The 
churches  have  power  to  ordain  their  own  officers  by 
some  deputed  out  of  their  own  number,  in  case  of 
the  want  of  officers.  Isaac  Chauncy  ^^  answers 
the  question :  "  Who  shall  ordain  when  there  are 
no  elders  ? "  saying :  "  Who  should  do  it  but  the 
church  that  called  him?"  The  power  is  in  the 
church,  if  necessary,  to  lay  on  hands  by  some 
brother  delegated  and  appointed  thereto ;  for  foreign 
ministers  cannot  do  an  authoritative  act  in  that 
church.  He  argues^*  that  the  church  is  superior  to 
all  the  ministers  thereof;  hence  that  the  church  may 
ordain  them  :  and  that"^  a  person  should  be  or- 
dained by  the  church  that  calls  him,  being  no  more 
than  the  public  solemn  recognition  of  their  call  and 
his  acceptance.     It  ought  to  be  performed  decent!  v 


288  OKDINATION. 

and  to  the  honor  of  God,  with  solemn  prayer;  dele- 
gates from  other  churche3  being  present  as  wit- 
nesses. Increase  Mather,  in  his  Vindication  of  the 
New  England  Churches,*^  quotes  from  Owen: 
"  Where  elders  cannot  be  had,  ordination  may  be 
performed  by  those  not  elders."  Lambert,  in  hi:j 
History  of  New  Haven  Colony,"^  says,  Mr.  Prudden, 
of  Milford,  records  his  own  ordination  by  three 
brethren,  "  designed  by  y^  church  for  that  work,  y° 
18  of  April,  1640."  Bentley,  in  his  Description  of 
Salem,*'  shows  that  the  church  there,  in  the  begin- 
ning, determined  that  the  authority  of  ordin*^tion 
should  not  rest  in  the  ministry,  but  depend  entirely 
on  the  free  election  of  the  church.  They  were  care- 
ful to  record  that  they  acknowledged  no  jurisdiction 
in  the  church  of  Plymouth,  when  they  invited  them 
to  Mr.  Higginson's  ordination.  Eliot,  in  his  Eccle- 
siastical History  of  Massachusetts,^"^  says  that  in 
1642  Mr.  Carter  was  ordained  in  Woburn  by  the 
church,  who  would  not  call  the  elders  of  other 
churches  to  do  it,  lest  it  should  lead  to  presbytery  and 
dependence  of  churches.  Dr.  Eckley,  in  his  Dudlean 
Lecture,^^  says :  "  We  differ  from  our  episcopal 
brethren  as  respects  the  right  of  any  particular 
church  to  elect  and  consecrate  its  own  officers,  no 
less  than  to  perform  the  other  acts  of  jurisdiction, 
without  the  aid  of  presbyters,  bishops,  or  pastors  of 
other  churches ;  and  to  the  special  propriety  of  these 
measures,  whenever,  through  any  extraordinary  oc- 
currences, the  assistance  of  such  ministers  cannot 
be  obtained.  .  .  .  Not  only  the  independence,  but  the 
very  existence,  of  a  Christian  society  would  be  lost, 


ORDINATION.  •     289 

in  the  event  of  its  denial."     Hunter,  in  his  Life  of 
Oliver  Heywood,"  asserts  that  it  is  a  fundamental 
principle  of  Congregationalism,  that  it  was  not  the 
intention  of  the  founders  of   Christianity  that  all 
who  take  upon  them  the   Christian  name  should 
form  one  vast  society;   but  that  every  organized 
society,  with  pastor  and  deacon,  was  a  true  Christian 
church,  which  may  call  a  pastor,  and  invest  him 
with  office,  without  ordination  by  bishop  or  any 
body  of  presbyters ;  though  ministers  might  witness 
the  act,  and  make  (invoke)  a  divine  blessing  upon 
it.    He  asserts  ^^  that  Goodwin,  Bridge,  Nye,  Simp- 
son, and  Burroughs  were  nearly  of  this  opinion. 
Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,^'*  says :  "  They  ap- 
point some  of  themselves  to  impose  hands  on  their 
officers."      And  '*    "  Mr.    Hooke   was   ordained   in 
Taunton  by  a  schoolmaster,"  and  Mr.  Hooke  joined 
in  ordaining  Mr.  Streate.    He  says  '^  that  the  elders 
in  Boston  replied  to  his  question,  saying :  "  If  the 
people  have  power  to  choose  their  own  officers,  they 
have  power  to  ordain  them."     Upham,  in  his  Dedi- 
cation Sermon,'^  says :  "  The  Salem  church  them- 
selves laid  hands  on  their  ruling  elder;  he  on  the 
teacher,  and  both  in  the  same  form  on  their  pastor." 
In  the  Appendix  to  the  same,'^  he  reiterates  Eliot's 
above-quoted  assertion  relative  to  the  power  of  or- 
dination residing  in  the  people,  and  asserts  ^^  that 
when    John    Higginson   was    ordained,   in    1660, 
"  Major  Hawthorne  and  the  deacons  imposed  hands 
upon    him,   in    the   presence   of    the    neighboring 
churches  and  elders."     The  same  is  repeated  in  his 
Second  Century  Sermon,  page  39,  and  Eliot's  Bio- 
25 


290  ORDINATION. 

graphical  Dictionary  255.  Dr.  Emmons ^°  says: 
"  People  have  a  right  to  choose  their  own  officers, 
and  then  install  them  into  office.  .  .  .  The  rie^ht  is 
primarily  and  solely  in  the  church ;  and  when  minis- 
ters ordain,  it  is  because  they  are  invited  and  ap- 
pointed by  the  church  to  do  it."  So,  too,  Ains- 
worth,  in  his  Answer  to  Clyfton;^^  and  Lord  Brooke, 
in  his  Discourse  on  Episcopacy."*^  —  See  Bacon's 
Ch.  Manual,  138,  139.  —  See  Imposition  of  Hands, 
hy  whom ;  Councils,  can  they  ordain  and  depose  ? 

iJnHan.  i.  58.  ^  ib.  94.  =*  lb.  252.  *  lb.  ii.  64.  =  lb.  175. 
«Ib.  188.  'lb.  578.  ^  lb.  iii.  44.  »  In  Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  8. 
1"  Chap.  ix.  sect.  5.  ^^  Survey,  part  ii.  69.  ^-  lb.  78.  »^  Vol.  i. 
370.  ^*  Page  374.  ^*  lb.  '«  Hubbard,  408.  ^^  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet. 
101.  *3  Vol.  ii.  209.  ^3  Page  58.  ^o  ib.  60.  ^i  Pages  56—60. 
'2  VHcs.  iii.  210.  ^3  Page  104.  ^4  Diy.  Inst.  Cong.  Chs.  70.  =5  Jb. 
72.  26  lb.  78—83.  27  Page  96.  ^s  Page  101.  ^^In  Hist.  Soc. 
Col.  series  i.  vol.  vi.  242.  '■^^  In  ib.  series  i.  vol.  ix.  39.  ^^  Pages 
15,  16.  3a  Page  58.  ^^  Ib.  39.  '■^^  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii. 
vol.  iii.  64.  '^^  Ib.  96.  ^e  ib.  io8.  ^7  page  22.  '^'^  Page  52.  '^^  Ib. 
65.     40  Vol.  V.  448—450.     ■*'  In  Han.  i.  252.     ^2  ib.  ii.  126. 

ORDINATION,  mode  o/.— Cotton  Mather^  de- 
scribes it  as  differing  in  his  day  from  the  present 
usual  mode,  in  that  the  letter  missive  often  desig- 
nated persons  to  perform  the  several  parts,  except 
the  right  hand  of  fellowship.  Usually  the  person 
ordained  preached ;  sometimes  another.  The  vote 
of  the  church  and  the  acceptance  of  the  call  were 
repeated  at  the  ordination.  (This  was  practised 
since  the  remembrance  of  the  compiler.)  Hands 
were  also  imposed  during  the  giving  of  the  charge, 
and  a  prayer  succeeded  it.  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his 
Divine    Institution    of    Congregational    Churches, 


ORDINATION.  291 

shows*  that  a  ruling  elder  or  delegated  brother  (of 
the  church)  repeats  the  questions  as  to  the  call  and 
acceptance;  the  brethren  voting  by  the  lifting  up 
of  the  hand,  the  pastor  elect  assenting.  Eliot,  in 
his  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Massachusetts,^  shows 
that  at  first  there  was  no  sermon  at  ordination, 
though  afterwards  the  minister  ordained  usually 
preached.  (He  attributes  the  change  to  John  Cot- 
ton.) Mr.  John  Higginson  preached  his  own  ordi- 
nation sermon  in  1660;  Thomas  Prince,  in  1718; 
(five  years  before,  Mr.  Pemberton  discoursed  at 
the  ordination  of  Mr.  Sewall,  his  colleague ;)  "^  Mr. 
Maccarty  at  Worcester,  in  1747.  Mr.  Rogers  of  Ips- 
wich^ preached  at  his  own  ordination  as  early  as 
1638.  For  modern  mode,  see  Upham's  Rat.  Dis. 
117 ;  Punchard's  View,  164.  —  See  Church,  mode 
of  constituting; 

»  Bat.  Dis.  22—42.  ^  Page  82.  '  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i. 
vol.  ix.  13.  ^  The  printed  discourse  itself.  *  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet. 
408. 

ORDINATION,  method  of  keeping  a  day  of  — 
Cotton  ^  shows  that  it  was  kept  with  preaching, 
prayer,  humiliation,  and  fasting,  "  till  near  the  close 
of  the  day,"  when  the  ordination-services  were  per- 
formed. The  Description  of  the  Visible  Church,^ 
and  Mather's  Rat.  Dis.^  maintain  that  "  it  should 
be  kept  as  a  sacred  fast  unto  the  Lord." 

^  Way,  40.    ^  In  Punchard's  Hist.  366.     '  Page  24. 

ORDINATION,  mode  of  objecting  to.  —  A  coun- 
cil at  Springfield,^  about  1736,  decided  that  they 


292  PASTOR. 

expected  the  dissatisfied  should  not  only  present 
objections  but  proofs,  and  that  there  should  not  be 
a  public  hearing  of  the  matter,  unless  some  ap- 
peared as  accusers. 

*  Ans.  to  Hampshire  Narr.  59,  64 — 67. 

ORDINATION,  should  it  be  repeated  ?  — IsasiC 
Chauncy  says  *  that  the  contrary  "  conceit  ...  is  a 
Popish  error ;  for  churches  are  no  more  prisons  to 
ministers  than  to  people,  .  .  .  and  one  church's  ordi- 
nation of  a  man  cannot  make  him  pastor  of  an- 
other." 

*  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  83. 

PARISH,  not  a  Christian  church.  —  Euring,  in 
his  Answer  to  Drake's  Ten  Counter  Demands,^ 
shows  this  conclusively :  "  Your  parish  assemblies 
do  not  gladly  receive  the  apostles'  doctrine."  —  See 
Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  38,  317—323. 

1  In  Han.  i.  362,  363. 

PASTOR,  his  official  duties.  —  The  True  Descrip- 
tion of  the  Visible  Church  ^  describes  them  some- 
what figuratively.  I  epitomize  thus,  —  To  feed  the 
sheep ;  guide  and  keep  them  ;  draw  them  to  him ; 
look  into  their  souls ;  discern  their  diseases ;  cure 
them  by  appropriate  medicine ;  give  warning,  that 
they  may  orderly  proceed  to  excorrimunication  ; 
w^atch  over  and  defend  the  flock.  Cambridge  Plat- 
form ^  distinguishes  his  office  from  that  of  teacher, 
in  that  it  is  the  pastor's  special  work  to  attend  to 
exhortation,  and  that  of  the  teacher  to  doctrine : 


PASTOR.  293 

and  either  of  them  to  administer  seals,  and  preach 
the  gospel.  Goodwin  refines  at  large  on  the  dis- 
tinction.' Jacob's  Church  Confession  '^  maintains 
that  he  should  be  trusted  to  rule  in  all  ordinary 
affairs  of  the  church ;  "  yet  so  that,  in  matters  of 
weight,  the  whole  congregation  (i.e.  church)  do  un- 
derstand thereof,  before  any  thing  be  finished,  and 
also  that  the  congregation  do  not  manifestly  dissent 
therefrom.  Owen,  in  his  Eshcol.  or  Rules  of  Walk- 
ing in  Fellowship,  rule  vii.*  maintains,  from  Acts 
xiv.  27,  their  right  to  call  the  church  together.  In 
his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  v.^  he  makes 
his  duties  to  be,  to  preach  the  word,  pray  for  the 
ilock,  administer  seals,  and  ^  visit  the  sick.  He 
argues  ^  that  it  is  not  the  pastor's  duty  to  go  up  and 
down  preaching  for  the  conversion  of  strangers, 
though  he  occasionally  should.  Hooker,  in  his 
Survey,^  makes  it  his  duty  to  work  on  the  will  and 
affections,  to  win  and  woo  the  soul,  to  lay  open  the 
loathsome  nature  of  sin,  and  quicken  the  renewed 
soul  to  every  holy  work.  Davenport,  in  his  Apolo- 
getical  Reply ,^°  argues  that  pastors  govern  by  feed- 
ing the  church  of  God,  not  by  having  the  church 
depend  on  their  authority.  He  quotes  Ames  on 
1  Pet.  V.  3  to  sustain  him.  From  the  votes  of  the 
church  and  doings  of  a  council  in  Dorchester,"  it 
appears  that  in  1774  the  church  negatived  the  mo- 
tion of  the  pastor  for  a  church  meeting,  at  a  given 
time ;  that  the  pastor  refused  to  attend  another 
church  meeting,  because  it  was  not  of  his  appoint- 
ment ;  that  the  church  refused  to  proceed  to  busi- 
ness at  another  time,  when  called  to  by  the  pastor ; 

25* 


294  PASTOR. 

that  he  attempted  to  dissolve  a  church  meeting  by 
his  own  power,  and  that  he  frequently  refused  to 
attend  church  meetings  which  he  declined  to  ap- 
point.    The  council  did  not  sustain  the  pastor. 

1  In  Punchard's  Hist.  368.  ^  Page  30.  ^  Ch.  Gov.  book  vi. 
chap.  viii.  *  Art.  xiv.  in  Han.  i.  298.  ^  Works,  xix.  77.  ^  lb. 
XX.  433.  '  lb.  450.  »  lb.  445.  »  Part  ii.  19,  20.  ^^  Page  298. 
"  Pages  5—8. 

» 

PASTOR,  has  he  a  negative  vote  in  the  church  ?  — 
Increase  Mather,  in  his  Disquisition  on  Ecclesiastical 
Councils,^  incidentally  intimates  that  the  Platform 
gives  him  this  power.  Eliot,  in  his  Ecclesiastical 
History  of  Massachusetts,^  says :  "  After  the  Plat- 
form, some  ministers  claimed  more  than  it  gave 
them,  and  some  claimed  a  power  to  negative  the 
proceedings  of  the  church."  Zabdiel  Adams,  in 
his  Answer  to  a  Treatise  on  Church  Government,' 
says :  "  The  keys  are  so  lodged  with  elders  and 
brethren  as  never  to  be  used  but  by  mutual  con- 
sent." He  maintains,'*  that,  since  ruling  elders  have 
ceased,  the  whole  power  of  the  bench  of  elders  rests 
with  the  pastor.  Eliot  ^  asserts  that  in  these  mat- 
ters he  took  a  position  which  could  not  be  main- 
tained by  the  Platform,  nor  any  just  sentiments  of 
religious  freedom.  See  also  Allen's  Biographical 
Dictionary,  art.  Adams,  Zabdiel.  The  History  of 
Sterling  ^  shows,  that  Mr.  Mellen  held,  that,  if  there 
were  some  to  rule,  there  were  others  to  obey ;  and 
applied  it  to  the  negative  vote,  causing  much  trou- 
ble and  his  own  dismission.  President  Stiles,  who 
was   extensively   acquainted   with   the    churches,^ 


PASTOR.  295 

says :  I  know  of  no  more  than  one  church,  where 
the  pastor  has  a  negative  vote.  Some  pastors  have 
claimed  it  over  Congregational  churches  ;  but,  ex- 
cept being  moderator,  the  pastor  has  but  the  autho- 
rity of  a  private  brother,  according  to  the  true  prin- 
ciples of  Congregationalism.  He  says  :  ^  "  The 
churches  would  not  bear  a  negative  of  the  elder- 
ship." Dr.  Emmons  ^  says,  if  the  pastor  might 
negative  all  the  doings  and  votes  of  the  church, 
they  would  have  no  power  at  all.  He  is  a  mere 
moderator,  and,  with  respect  to  voting,  stands  on 
the  same  ground  with  a  private  brother.  See  Up- 
ham's  Rat.  Dis.  83 — 85, 107. —  See  Churches  begun 
without  officers^  Sfc;  Members  have  equal  rights; 
Majorities, 

»  Page  14.  »  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  =»  Page  83.  "  lb.  76—80. 
*  Biog.  Diet.  17,  18.  »  In  Wor.  Mag.  ii.  ^  Conv.  Serm.  68.  »  lb. 
64.    »  Vol.  V.  451,  452. 

PASTOR,  power  to  elect  him  is  in  the  church. — 
Cotton  ^  says,  that,  though  his  office  is  from  Christ, 
the  power  to  elect  is  in  the  church.  But  he  as- 
serts,^ that  they  do  it  with  the  approbation  of  other 
churches,  because  in  the  multitude  of  counsellors 
there  is  safety.  He  quotes  ^  Cyprian,  lib.  i.  epist.  41 : 
"  People  have  the  power  of  choosing  worthy  bishops, 
and  of  rejecting  the  unworthy."  Clemens  Roma- 
nus  *  says  the  apostles  appointed  officers  "  with  the 
good  liking  and  consent  of  the  church."  Robinson, 
in  his  Answer  to  Helwisse,*  says :  "  For  the  choice 
of  officers,  we  do  take  for  our  direction  the  practice 
of  the  apostles  and  apostolical  churches,  grounded 


296  PASTOR. 

on  perpetual  equity,  that  men  should  choose/  them 
under  Christ,  unto  whose  faithfulness,  under  the 
same  Christ,  they  are  to  commit  their  souls."  This 
doctrine  is  maintained  in  the  Apology  of  the  Over- 
seers, &c.  of  the  English  Church  at  Amsterdam. 
Foxcroft,  in  his  Sermon  Preparatory  to  the  Choice 
of  a  Minister,^  asserts  that  "  none  but  members 
have  a  just  right  to  vote  in  ecclesiastical  affairs.  .  .  . 
A  good  deal  of  prudence  is  necessary  to  consult 
the  congregation,  while  the  right  of  the  church  to 
election  is  asserted  and  exercised."  Dr.  Ware,  in 
his  History  of  the  Old  North  and  New  Brick 
Churches,^  asserts  that  Cotton  Mather's  church,  in 
1697,  sent  a  letter  of  admonition  to  the  church  in 
Charlestown,  for  betraying  the  liberties  of  the 
churches,  by  putting  into  the  hands  of  the  whole 
inhabitants  the  choice  of  a  minister. —  See  Elders 
chosen  by  the  people;  Officers  chosen  by  the  people, 

MVay,  43.  "  ib.  45.  ^  ib.  64.  '•Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
23.  ^  In  Punchard's  Hist.  338  ;  and  Works,  iii.  135.  «  Pages  17, 
20.    7  Pasre  18. 


PASTOR,  mode  of  election  of.  —  Cotton  Mather  * 
shows  the  mode  of  proceeding  in  his  time,  much  as 
at  the  present  day,  first  by  the  church,  and  then  by 
the  parish  concurring,  as  described  by  Mitchell  in 
his  Guide,  175,  176.  Barrowe,  in  his  Refutation 
of  Giffard,^  asserts  that  every  member  should  have 
the  privilege  of  assent  or  dissent,  showing  his  rea- 
sons. —  See  Punchard's  View,  11^ 

^  Bat.  Dis.  14—22.    ^  in  Han.  i.  57. 


i 


PASTOR.  297 

PASTOR,  liow  dismissed.  —  See  Minister,  how 
dismissed;  ^Iso  Punchard's  View,  175.  Some  spe- 
cial cases  might  be  cited,  as  those  of  Bolton  and 
Stirling ;  but  it  would  seem  much  more  necessary 
to  inform  people  generally  how  to  keep^  than  how 
to  dismiss^  a  pastor. 

PASTOR  should  not  he  lightly  removed.  —  Cam- 
bridge Association  *  intimated  that  God  frowns  on 
rash  removals  of  ministers.  They,  however,  admit 
that  they  may  be  removed,  "  when  benefit  from 
their  ministry  is  to  be  despaired  of ;  ...  in  case  it  be 
necessary  for  the  common  good ;  ...  in  case  they 
want  sustenance,  ...  or  have  chronical  diseases 
which  may  not  be  removed."  Owen,  in  his  Nature 
of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  v.,^  says  the  ancient 
church  made  great  provisions  against  it.  He  thinks, 
however,  that  there  may  be  occasions  for  their  re- 
moval, with  the  consent  of  all  concerned.  A  pastor 
cannot  voluntarily  lay  down  his  office  for  mere  age 
or  weakness,  because  he  is  not  required  to  do  more 
than  he  can  ;  nor  for  weariness  and  despondency. 
But  it  is  lawful  on  an  incurable  decay  of  mental 
abilities,  incurable  divisions  in  a  church,  neglect  of 
support,  or  when  the  church  will  not  do  important 
duties.  He  may  then  retire  to  private  life,  or  take 
office  in  another  church.  Cotton  Mather,  in  his 
Ratio  Disciplinse,^  shows  that  the  translation  of  a 
pastor  was  then  accomplished  with  the  greatest 
difficulty.  He  should  have  it  in  his  heart  to  live 
and  die  with  his  people.  When  there  was  but  one 
pastor,  and  he  ever  so  great,  and  his  people  ever  so 


298  PASTOR. 

small,  nobody  scarce  durst  whisper  about  his  remo- 
val. The  people  were  jealous  of  such  efforts,  as 
though  Robbers  of  Churches  were  assaulting 
them.  But  in  some  cases  a  council  have  recom- 
mended a  removal,  notwithstanding  the  people's 
dissent.  Eliot,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Mas- 
sachusetts,"* says  that  the  magistrates  and  ministers 
aided  in  the  removal  of  Mr.  Norton  to  Boston, 
thinking  that  it  would  be  an  advantage  to  have  him 
here.  Wisner,  in  his  History  of  the  Old  South 
Church,  informs  us  ^  that  the  church  in  New  Haven 
would  not  dismiss  Mr.  Davenport ;  but,  as  he  would 
not  be  persuaded,  they  would  not  further  oppose 
him.  4-nd  ^  they  "  ceased,  saying.  The  will  of  the 
Lord  be  done."  They  left  him  and  the  church  in 
Boston  to  m^vc  what  use  of  it  (their  inaction)  they 
could,  without  giving  him  a  letter,  though  they  dis- 
missed his  wife  and  son  and  son's  wife.  Dr.  Ware 
informs  us,  in  his  History  of  the  Old  North  and 
New  Brick  Churches,^  that  the  New  Brick  Church 
grew  out  of  a  controversy  about  calling  a  minister 
already  settled  (Rev.  Peter  Thacherof  Weymouth). 
The  ministers  of  Boston  opposed,  and  requested 
not  to  be  invited  on  the  ordaining  council.  The 
Boston  ministers,  in  connection  with  their  answer 
to  a  question,  say  ^  that  they  look  on  such  removals 
as  directly  tending  to  unsettle  and  disquiet  churches. 
See  Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  161—164. 

*  In  Magnal.  ii.  215.  ^  Works,  xx.  458,  459.  ^  Pages  167— 170- 
*  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  ix.  30.  ^  Page  7.  ®  lb.  75. 
'  Pages  25,  26.  ^  Objections  to  the  Rev.  Peter  Thacher's  Ordi- 
nation, 22. 


I 


PASTOR.  299 

PASTOR,  is  he  censurable  hy  his  church  ?  —  Rich- 
ard Mather,  in  his  Church  Government  and  Church 
Covenant/  argues  that  every  pastor  is  censurable 
by  his  own  church.  Robinson,  in  his  Answer  to 
Bernard,^  says :  "  If  elders  .  .  .  may  displace  a  pas- 
tor by  their  authority,  they  may  also  set  him  up  by 
their  authority."  The  Low  Country  Exiles,  in  their 
Confession,  art.  xxiii.^  maintain  the  same  doctrine, 
and  add :  "  Yea,  if  the  case  so  require,  to  cut  them 
off  by  excommunication."  Ainsworth,  in  his  An- 
swer to  Clyfton,*  argues  that  liis  people  (who  put 
him  in)  may  put  him  out  of  the  pastoral  office; 
"  and  why  may  they  not  put  him  quite  out  of  the  fold 
of  Christ,  that  is,  excommunicate  him  ?  "  Jacob's 
Church  Confession,  article  xiv.*  says :  "  They  have 
nothing  more  than  what  the  church  doth  commit 
unto  them,  and  which  they  may  not,  when  need  re- 
quireth,  take  away  from  them,  yea,  to  their  utter 
deposing  and  rejection  out  of  the  church  itself,  if 
such  necessity  be."  Davenport,  in  his  power  of 
Congregational  Churches,^  says:  "  Nor  doth  it  make 
the  people  rulers  of  their  rulers,  .  .  .  that  the  church 
hath  power  over  them,  in  case  of  delinquency ;  for 
excommunication  is  not  an  act  of  the  highest  rule, 
but  of  the  highest  judgment.  ...  If  the  rjiinisters 
become  delinquents,  then,  as  members,  they  are 
under  the  whole."  Wise,  in  his  Quarrel  of  the 
Churches  Espoused,^  comments  pointedly  on  the 
first  "  Proposals  "  to  take  Congregational  ministers 
from  the  watch  and  discipline  of  their  churches, 
and  commit  them  to  associations.  Hooker,  in  his 
Survey,^  says,  every  brother,  and  therefore  Archip- 


800  PASTOR. 

pus  the  elder,  if  he  be  a  brother,  is  liable  to  church 
censure.  Samuel  Mather,  in  his  Apology,'  quotes 
Zanchy :  "  No  one  is  exempted  from  this  discipline, 
whether  he  be  an  elder  or  pastor  or  magistrate, 
unless  he  would  be  exempted  from  the  number  of 
the  brethren,  and  therefore  of  the  sons  of  God." 
Goodwin,  in  his  Catechism,^"  says:  "  If  Peter  him- 
self offend,  and  Peter  will  not  hear  thee,  tell  the 
church  of  Peter  :  Christ  alone  and  his  church  is  kinsr 
and  judge  in  such  a  case."  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his 
Divine  Institution  of  Congregational  Churches;" 
Eaton  and  Taylor,  in  their  Defence ;  ^^  and  Baynes, 
in  his  Diocesan's  Trial,^^  argue  in  the  same  strain. 
Mitchell,  in  his  Guide,^*  supposes  that  the  doctrine 
of  Saybrook  Platform,  which  gives  discipline  to 
associations  in  such  cases,  is  the  general  usage.  If 
so,  it  must  be  by  recent  innovation.  Cambridge 
Platform,  after  showing  how  he  may  be  deposed  by 
his  church,'*  adds:  "And  being  now  but  a  mem- 
ber, .  .  .  the  church,  that  had  power  to  receive  him 
into  their  fellowship,  hath  also  the*  same  power  to 
cast  him  out  that  they  have  concerning  any  other 
member."  It  is  obvious  that  a  minister  ought 
still  to  be  amenable  somewhere,  and  not  to  cease 
to  be  a  member  of  Christ's  church.  See  Upham's 
Rat.  Dis.  170,  176;  Punchard's  View,  1H2,  270.— 
See  next  article ;  see  also  Churches,  proceedings 
when  pastors  offend;  Ministers,  how  deposed. 

^  Page  48.     **  In  Punchard's  Hist.  331,  332 ;  and  "Works,  ii 
239.     '  In  Han.  i.  94.     -» ib.  251.     ^  lb.  297.    «  lb.  ii.  65.    '  Pages 
118—120.     »  Part  iii.  3.     »  Page  98.     »»  Page  23.     "  Page  104. 
"  Page  58.     13  Page  88.    "  Pages  232—235.     *^  Chap,  x,  sect.  6. 


PASTOR.  301 

PASTOR,  is  he  a  member  of  his  church  ?  —  Welde, 
in  his  Answer  to  Rathband/  says  it  is  our  universal 
and  constant  course  not  to  organize  a  church  till 
they  have  one  amongst  themselves  fit  for  a  minister, 
whom,  with  all  speed,  they  call  into  office.  Cotton 
Mather,  in  his  Ratio  Disciplinae,^  speaking  of  elec- 
tion and  ordination,  says :  "  There  is  a  seasonable 
care  taken,  that,  if  the  candidate  were  a  member 
of  some  other  church,  he  have  his  dismission  (his 
relation  declared  to  be  transferred) ;  that,  as  near  as 
may  be,  according  to  the  primitive  direction,  they 
may  choose  from  among  themselves."  Cotton,  in 
his  Way,^  says,  destitute  churches  look  out  from 
among  themselves  such  as  are  qualified  to  be  offi- 
cers. Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his  Divine  Institution  of 
Congregational  Churches,*  says  the  person  called 
ought  to  be  a  member;  for  to  constitute  a  non- 
member  in  office  is  contrary  to  the  rules  of  any 
corporate  society.  So*  "none  can  be  an  officer  of 
a  corporation,  but  he  that  is  incorporate  first  as  a 
member."  Dr.  Dwight®  maintains  that  a  pastor 
should  not  be  a  member  of  his  church,  Mitchell,  in 
his  Guide,^  has  a  chapter  on  the  membership  of 
ministers,  and  complains  severely  of  Upham  for  as- 
serting that  they  are  members  and  censurable  by  the 
brethren,  denying  that  such  is  general  usage,  unless 
in  Upham's  own  locality.  He  thinks  him  to  have 
been  influenced  by  consulting  old  writers.  His  well- 
informed  readers  may  think  so  too,  especially  by 
Trumbull's  Connecticut,  which  shows  that  the  Say- 
brook  plan  was  not  claimed  in  the  beginning,  even 
by  its  friends,  to  be  pure  Congregationalism.  See 
26 


302  PEACE. 

Upham's  Rat.  Dis.  127—130;  Piinchard's  View, 
270 — 272.  —  See  last  preceding  article,  particularly 
quotation  from  Cambridge  Platform ;  also  Conso- 
ciations. 

'  In  Han.  ii.  329.  «  Pago  22.  '  Page  39.  *  Page  65.  >  lb. 
104.    8  Works,  Serm.  clvii.    '  Pages  237—242. 

PASTOR,  colleague.  —  Mr.  Foxcroft  settled  as 
colleague  with  Mr.  Wads  worth  in  1717/  and  Dr. 
Chauncy  was  ordained  colleague  with  Mr.  Foxcroft 
in  1727.^^  Mr.  Foxcroft,  the  senior  pastor,  was  then 
but  thirty  years  of  age.  Previous  to  about  this 
time,  the  distinction  had  usually  been  that  of  Pas- 
tor and  Teacher. 

*  Mr.  Foxcroft's  Sermon  at  his  own  Ordination,  *  Sermon  of 
ib.  preparatory  to  the  Choice  of  a  Minister. 

PEACE.  —  This  has  always  been  considered  by 
Congregationalists  as  very  desirable,  so  far  as  it 
may  consist  with  truth ;  but  the  doctrine  of  the 
league  with  iniquity  seems  to  be  a  modern  whim. 
Burroughs,  in  his  Irenicum,^  says :  "  Let  us  all  be 
for  peace,  yet  so  not  to  be  befooled  into  bondage  by 
the  name  of  peace.  Now  God  hath  by  his  mighty 
arm  helped  us,  let  us  not  be  put  off  with  a  bubble, 
and  made  to  believe  that  it  is  the  pearl.  We  know 
with  whom  we  have  to  deal."  This  was  written  at 
the  time  that  Cromwell's  army  began  to  make  their 
power  dreaded  by  the  Presbyterial  domination,  to 
whom  the  Independents  had  been  recently  petition- 
ing in  vain  for  a  mere  toleration. — See  Resistance. 

» In  Han.  iii.  125. 


PERSECUTION.  303 

PERFECTION  in  churches  impracticable.  —  Ro- 
binson, in  his  Apology/  says :  "  Foolish  were  we, 
if  we  knew  not  these  things ;  impudent,  if  we  de- 
nied them  to  be  true ;  and  unequal,  if  we  acknow- 
ledged not  .  .  .  that  many  .  .  .  blemishes  .  .  .  will 
creep  into  churches  in  our  days."  Even  so  rigid  a 
Separatist  as  Canne  says,  in  his  Reply  to  Dayrel :  ^ 
"  Whereas  Mr.  Barrowe,  Ainsworth,  and  others  do 
show  from  the  Scriptures  what  a  true  church  is, 
whereof  gathered,  how  every  member  should  walk, 
and  how  abuses  are  to  be  reformed,  &c. ;  he  either, 
through  ignorance  or  malice,  or  both,  still  inferreth 
from  their  writings,  that  they  held  perfection  of 
churches;  that  there  can  be  no  hypocrite  or  repro- 
bate in  the  church  ;  things  groundlessly  collected 
by  him."  And  even  Roger  Williams,  in  his  Hire- 
ling Ministry  None  of  Christ's,^  says :  "  God  hath 
covered  the  failings,  and  accepted  his  own  grace,  in 
such  men  as  Calvin,  Luther,  &c.,  as  he  did  the  poly- 
gamy and  sin  of  the  patriarchs  of  Israel." 

*  In  Han.  i.  386 ;  and  Works,  iii.  72.    « lb.  521.    '  Page  10. 

PERSECUTION,  what  amount  of,  justifies  disper- 
sion ?  —  Goodwin,  in  his  Church  Government,* 
maintains  that  the  spoiling  of  goods  is  not  a  suffi- 
cient justification.  The  church  should  bear  it  joy- 
fully, remain  and  testify ;  but,  when  it  comes  to  the 
endangering  of  life,  then  they  may  disperse.  God 
will  have  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice.  Simpson,  be- 
fore the  House  of  Commons,^  maintained  that  per- 
secution must  never  hinder  confession,  though  it 
may  profession  of   some  things  which  are  good. 


304  PERSECUTION. 

We  must  own  God,  even  though  the  point  be  at 
the  breast,  and  the  dagger  at  the  heart;  but  we  need 
not  attend  all  positive  ordinances  at  such  perils.  — 
See  Flight. 

»  Page  262.    =  Han.  ii.  212. 

PERSECUTION  for  Congregationalism.  —  Many 
of  our  intelligent  people  seem  little  aware  of  the 
amount  of  persecution  which  our  fathers  endured 
for  their  faith.  Let  such  learn  from  Neal's  History 
of  the  Puritans,  the  deprivations,  imprisonment,  ex- 
ile, and  various  sufferings  of  the  thousands  of  such 
men  for  their  nonconformity;  and,  in  Punchard's 
History  of  Congregationalism,  chap,  xiv.,  of  the 
martyrdom  of  Barrowe,  Greenwood,  and  Penry,  for 
the  same  cause.  Then  there  was  the  slow  martyr- 
dom of  the  multitudes  of  men,  women,  and  children, 
who  perished  for  it  in  the  English  prisons,  in  Eliza- 
beth's, the  James's,  and  the  Charles's  reigns,  throw- 
ing into  the  shade  all  the  sufferings  by  the  fires  of 
Smithfield,  in  that  of  the  bloody  Mary.  These  are 
the  best  antidote  against  longings  for  the  fleshpots 
of  Egyptio-English  prelacy  in  Congregationalists. 
Even  in  New  England,  Rev.  J.  Moody  was  im- 
prisoned by  Gov.  Cranfield,  of  New  Hampshire,  in 
1684,  because  he  administered  the  communion  not 
according  to  the  way  of  the  Church  of  England. 
He  then  forbade  his  preaching,  which  was  the  occa- 
sion of  his  coming  to  Boston.^  Neal,  in  his  Histo- 
ry of  New  England,^  says  that,  in  1573,  ministers 
were  examined,  "whether  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  were   good  and  godly,  every  tittle   of   it 


PLATFORM.  305 

grounded  on  the  Holy  Scriptures  ?  and  whether  the 
thirty-nine  articles  were  agreeable  to  the  word  of 
God  or  not?  Whether  we  must  of  necessity  follow 
the  primitive  church  in  such  things  as  are  used  and 
established  or  not?  and  whether  all  ministers  should 
be  equal  ?  and  for  not  giving  satisfactory  answers, 
many  were  cast  into  prison."  —  See  Separation  ; 
Authority,  human. 

»  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  327.    '  Vol.  i.  55. 

PLATFORM,  Cambridge;  its  import,  —  Hon.  S. 
Haven  ^  says :  "  When  the  Platform  was  framed, 
the  community  consisted  partly  of  those  who  held 
the  power  of  the  church  to  be  in  church  officers, 
and  partly  of  those  who  held  it  to  be  in  the  bre- 
thren." President  Stiles  ^  says,  three  or  four  of  the 
ministers  who  formed  the  platform  were  Presbyte- 
rian, i.e.  for  giving  church  presbyters  all  power; 
several  for  giving  a  negative  vote  to  the  elders; 
and  the  rest  agreed  with  the  almost  universal  sense 
of  the  brotherhood  in  the  pure  and  unmixed  idea  of 
a  Congregational  churchy  viz.  all  disciplinary  power 
vested  in  the  fraternity.  And^  he  asserts  that  the 
authors  of  the  Platform  agreed  on  a  different  course 
of  procedure  in  the  churches  holding  different  prin- 
ciples. He  says^:  "  Though  the  compilers  of  the 
Cambridge  Platform  hoped  to  have  introduced  a 
triumvirate  presbytery  in  each  congregation,  .  .  .  yet 
the  authority  of  such  presbytery  was  confined  to 
such  churches  as  received  it."  It  was  received  with 
a  multitude  of  interspersions,  securing  the  indepen- 
dency and  uncontrollable  power  of  churches,  and 

26* 


306  PLATFORMS. 

was  adopted  at  last  by  a  compromise.  Neal,  in 
his  History  of  New  England,*  says :  "  All  did  not 
agree  to  the  Platform,  but  all  acquiesced  in  it." 
One  thing  concerning  which  they  differed  was  the 
power  of  ministers  to  administer  seals  where  they 
were  not  pastors. 

'  Proceedings  of  the  First  Chtirch  and  Parish  of  DedJiam,  62. 
*  Conv.  Serm.  57,  58.    =<  lb.  66.    *  lb.     *  Vol.  i.  273—275. 

PLATFORM,  Sayhrook,  import  of,  —  Dr.  Stiles 
asserts,^  that  the  first  principles  laid  down  in  the 
Saybrook  Platform,  and  some  of  the  evident  inter- 
lining, often  clash  with  each  other,  —  the  first  giving 
uncontrolled  power  to  the  churches  ;  and  the  other, 
controlling  power  to  consociations;  and  that  it  is 
to  be  supposed  that  the  churches  adopted  it  in  a 
sense  subordinate  to  the  first  principle. 

1  lb.  73,  74. 

PLATFORMS,  of  what  authority  ?  — Welde,  in 
his  Answer  to  Rathband,^  says :  "  We  hold  it  not 
unlawful  to  have  a  platform ;  .  .  .  yet  we  see  no 
ground  to  impose  such  a  platform  on  churches,  but 
leave  them  their  liberty  therein."  (See  Creeds.) 
Rathband  wonders  "  how  the  New  England  churches 
fell  into  so  exact  a  discipline  without  a  platform ! " 
Welde  informs  him,  that  it  was  "  because  they  had 
their  discipline  from  the  Scriptures,"  the  best  and 
the  most  consistent  directory  in  the  world.  Hub- 
bard ^  treats  of  the  opposition  of  some  to  the  first 
synod,  for  forming  Cambridge  Platform,  as  the 
ground  of  "  fear  that  it  was  intended  to  have  eccle- 
siastical laws  to  bind  the  churches,"  and  of  Mr. 


PLATFORMS.  307 

Norton's  success  in  overcoming  the  opposition,  by- 
laying  down  the  authority  of  a  synod  as  "  consulta- 
tive, declarative,  and  decisive,  not  coercive."     Mit- 
chell ^  says  of  our  platforms  and  confessions :  "  They 
were  never  set  up  as  standards  .  .  .  they  are  lights, 
which  all  are  free  to  use  or  not  as  they  please." 
Samuel  Mather,  alone  of  all  the  old  Congregational 
authors  to  my  knowledge,  maintains  *  that  the  Plat- 
form is  "  a  holy  pact  or  covenant,"  renewed  and 
transmitted  by  the  successive  councils,  synods,  and 
right  hands  of  fellowship,  performed  by  virtue  of  it ; 
as  though  these  things  could  not  be  done,  according 
to  the  Scriptures,  agreeably  to  the  Platform,  with- 
out receiving  the  whole  Platform  as  a  code  of  eccle- 
siastical laws.     His  reasoning  is  the  more  remarka- 
ble, considering  his  rigid   Congregationalism   and 
lucid  demonstrations  of  many  principles  totally  sub- 
versive of  this.     His  great-grandfather,  who  drafted 
the   Cambridge  Platform,  held  sentiments  exactly 
the  reverse  of  these.     (See  article   Creeds  ;   first 
item.)     Samuel  Mather,  however,  in  a  note,  p.  136, 
of  his  Apology,  shows  that  our  fathers  did  not  bind 
themselves  to  perpetual  conformity  to  the  Platform, 
nor  any  human  systems  and  forms.     The  Synod  of 
1679  approved  of  Cambridge  Platform  "/or  the  sub- 
stance of  it^'^  which.  Cotton  Mather*  shows,  means 
that  they  did  not  adopt  the  whole  of  it.     He  notes 
several  particulars  of  their  dissent,  as  a  pastor's  ad- 
ministering seals  in  another  church,  and  the  office 
of  ruling  elders.     Dr.  Stiles  ^  says :  "  Our  platforms 
were  received  by  the  body  of  the  churches,  only  as 
plans  of  union  and  mutual  fellowship."     Mr.  Nor- 


308  POOR. 

risj  of  Salem,  persevered  in  a  platform  of  his  own 
church ;  ^  and  Brattle-street  Church  was  constituted 
on  another  platform.^  In  his  Ecclesiastical  History 
of  Massachusetts,^  Eliot  informs  us,  that  "  the  de- 
puties of  several  congregations  would  not  yield 
such  a  power  to  the  civil  magistrates,  as  they  as- 
sumed by  calling  a  synod :  .  .  .  they  were  jealous 
that  such  a  power  might  be  erected  to  impose  a 
uniformity  of  practice."  Cotton  and  his  church  for 
a  time  opposed,  and  the  matter  was  compromised 
by  its  being  "  in  the  form  of  a  motion,  and  not  of 
command."  Minot,  in  his  History  of  Massachu- 
setts,^°  says:  Their  platform  united  their  churches 
to  a  certain  degree,  yet  "  exempted  them  from  any 
jurisdiction  by  way  of  authoritative  censure,  or  any 
church  power  extrinsic  to  their  own."  —  See  Up- 
ham's  Rat.  Dis.  36.  For  an  exhibition  of  the  play 
upon  the  ambiguity  of  Saybrook  Platform  by  the 
same  parties  in  and  out  of  power,  see  Bacon's  Hist. 
Discourses,  page  270,  and  elsewhere. 

^  In  Han.  ii.  296.  =  Hist.  Mass.  534—536.  '  Guide,  56.  *  Apo- 
logy, 136—139.  ^  Mag.  ii.  204.  ^  Conv.  Serm.  49.  '  Eliot,  Biog. 
Diet.  336.  »  lb.  84,  269.  »  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  ii.  vol.  i.  195. 
w  Vol.  i.  30. 

POOR  of  the  church  should  he  cared  for.  —  Ains- 
worth,  in  his  Answer  to  Paget,^  maintains  this  to 
be  a  duty,  even  to  selling  of  goods  and  parting  them 
as  every  man  hath  need.  K.  Chidley,  in  her  Justi- 
fication of  the  Independent  Churches  of  Christ,  tells 
T.  Edwards'^  that  the  separatist  English  churches 
"  maintain  all  their  own  poor,"  besides  being  taxed 


POWER.  309 

for  the  support  of  others.     The  question  is  an  open 
one  in  our  day,  and  under  our  circumstances. 

» In  Han.  i.  283.     ^ib.  ii.  112. 

POWER,  a  church  may  give  that  which  they  do 
not  possess. —  Hooker^  shows  that  "  those  who  have 
no  office-power  formaliter  may  give  such  power  by 
voluntary  subjection.  .  .  .  The  power  which  a  pastor 
hath  is  by  election,  and  extends  no  farther  than  to 
his  own  people."  Goodwin^  shows  that  office- 
power  is  founded  on  mutual  relation.  This  princi- 
ple, carried  out,  will  show  how  civil  governments 
may  have  powers  which  individual  electors  have 
not 

»  Survey,  part  ii.  72,  73.    »  Ch.  Gov.  68. 

POWER,  apostolical,  did  not  descend  to  succes- 
sors. —  Owen  asserts  and  abundantly  proves  this, 
in  the  preface  to  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church.^ 

^  Works,  XX.  342. 

POWER,  c/iwrcA,  installed  in  ministry  or  brethren? 
Ainsworth,  in  the  preface  of  his  Reply  to  Johnson,^ 
says :  "  Two  things  have  been  heretofore  contro- 
verted between  Mr.  Johnson  and  myself;  one  con- 
cerning the  power  of  the  Christian  church,  which 
he  would  have  installed  in  the  ministry  thereof." 
Cambridge  Platform^  says  the  power  of  office  is  in 
the  eldership,  and  the  power  of  privilege  in  the 
brethren :  "  The  latter  is  in  the  brethren  formally, 
immediately  from  Christ;  the  former  is  not  in  them 
formally,  but  may  be  said  to  be  in  them,  in  that 


310  POWER. 

they  design  the  persons  to  office."  (See  Platform, 
Cambridge;  Elders  rule  as  moderators;  Pastors, 
people  may  do  their  ivork,  SfC.;  Officers  abdicate 
when,  Sfc.)  Wise,^  in  his  Vindication,  shows  that 
the  people  under  the  gospel  are  the  first  subject  of 
church  power,  their  government  being  a  democracy. 
Even  in  electing  an  extraordinary  officer,  the  apos- 
tles themselves  referred  the  choice  to  the  brethren. 
The  process  of  discipline,  from  first  to  last,  is  by  the 
brethren.  Where  there  is  any  thing  amiss,  the  fra- 
ternity is  reprehended ;  and,  where  there  is  any 
thing  worthy  of  credit,  they  are  commended  in  the 
Scriptures.  In  his  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Es- 
poused,'* speaking  of  the  Proposals  (the  germ  of 
consociationism),  he  says  "they  give  power  to  asso- 
ciation to  have  the  first  cognizance  of  church  cases: 
our  goyernment  says.  No,  it  belongs  to  particular 
churches."  And  *  he  quotes  the  passage  above 
cited  from  the  Platform,  also  chap.  x.  sect.  6,  of  the 
deposing  of  elders.  By  this  means,  he  cuts  up  root 
and  branch  the  Proposals,  showing  that  they  have 
the  face  of  mere  Presbyterianism,  but  contain  the 
heart  and  core  of  Prelacy,  if  not  of  Papacy.  Da- 
venport, in  his  Apologetical  Reply,®  quotes  from 
Parker :  "  The  power  ecclesiastical  resides  in  the 
church."  Robinson,  in  his  Reply  to  Bernard,^  says 
of  ecclesiastical  power :  "  We  put  it  in  the  body 
of  the  congregation ;  .  .  .  the  multitude  called  the 
church."  -Elders  he  acknowledges  as  ordinary  gov- 
ernors, only  we  may  not  acknowledge  them  as  lords 
over  God's  heritage.  Hooker^  shows  that "  a  church 
is  before  its  officers ; .  .  .  else,  as  often  as  the  officers 


POWER.  311 

die,  the  church  dies."  Mather,  in  his  Answer  to 
Rutherford,  asks  ^  if  a  church  that  has  neighbors 
may  not  take  upon  itself  entireness  of  jurisdiction, 
as  well  as  one  that  has  none  ;  it  being  granted  that 
a  church  isolated  has  supreme  power  in  itself. 
President  Stiles  ^°  asserts  that  there  never  was  an 
instance  of  admission  to  a  church  (in  Connecticut), 
without  the  votes  of  the  brethren,  because  of  the 
spirit  of  liberty  in  the  churches.  See  Punchard's 
View,  56. —  See  Ministers,  how  deposed. 

» In  Han.  i.  320.  =  Page  28.  ^  Pages  44,  61,  56.  "  Page  104. 
*Ib.  118,  119.  »Page  240.  'In  Punchard's  Hist.  327;  and 
Works,  ii.  7.  »  Surv.  part  i.  93.  »  In  Han.  ii.  182.  »»  Conv. 
Serm.  66. 

POWER  of  churches  cannot  be  given  away,  nor 
taken  from  them.  —  Samuel  Mather,  in  his  Apology,* 
says:  "All  jurisdiction  .  .  .  should  be  confined  to 
particular  churches,  in  whose  hands  our  Saviour 
hath  left  it.  Nor  may  any  particular  churches  .  . . 
deprive  themselves  of  this  power ;  for,  in  so  doing, 
they  would  deprive  themselves  of  a  great  trust. 
For,  unless  they  have  and  keep  this  jurisdiction 
within  themselves,  they  cannot  faithfully  discharge 
various  other  duties  which  are  required  of  them  by 
Jesus  Christ,  their  lawgiver."  Speaking  in  opposi- 
tion to  juridical  power  in  councils,  he  says:'  "  The 
powers  and  privileges  of  particular  churches  are 
sacred  things,  by  no  means  to  be  slighted  and  un- 
dervalued, nor  to  be  left  to  the  mercy  of  any  classes, 
councils,  synods,  or  general  meetings."  Owen,  in 
his  nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  v.,'  shows 


312  PRATER. 

I 

that  church  power  is  of  such  a  nature  that  no  es- 
sential part  of  it  can  ever  be  delegated.  Hooker, 
in  his  Survey,*  says :  "  It  is  not  lawful  for  churches 
to  give  away  their  power,  nor  for  others  to  take  it 
from  them."  The  principle  on  which  all  these  asser- 
tions are  based  is,  that  the  exercise  of  this  power 
is  the  duty  of  the  members  themselves,  and  so  can- 
not be  devolved  on  others.  —  See  Punchard's  View, 
108, 123,  142. 

»  Page  20.    ^  Page  128.    ^  Works,  xx.  440.    ■*  Part  i.  250. 

PRACTICE  of  the  apostles  the  rule  of  church 
government.  —  Goodwin  argues  this,^  from  the  com- 
mission of  Christ,  "teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you,"  with  the 
title,  preface,  and  matter  of  the  Book  of  the  Acts. 
The  practices  recorded  in  the  Acts  are  evidently 
noted  as  hints  and  examples.  These  same  prac- 
tices were  introduced  into  other  churches :  Paul 
mentions  the  offices  of  deacons  and  elders,  as  the 
command  of  Christ,  in  1  Tim.  iii.  The  apostles 
refer  churches  to  their  example.  And,  again,  our 
Saviour,  his  apostles,  and  all  the  expounders  of  the 
moral  law,  thus  argue  from  examples. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  22—26. 

PRAYER  prescribed  unlawful.  —  The  supplica- 
tion to  King  James  I.^  argues  largely,  and  in  some 
points  conclusively,  against  the  lawfulness  of  such 
prayers,  especially  in  the  Liturgy  of  the  English 
Church,  which  "  perverts  the  right  use  of  Scripture." 
Robinson,  in  his  Apology,^  shows  that  the  apostles 


PKAYER.  313 

did  not  use  any  set  forms  of  prayer,  and  that  the 
Lord's  Prayer  is  not  a  model  of  any  set  form  of 
words,  but  of  the  spirit  of  a  prayer.  (See  Lord's 
Prayer.)  Lord  Say,  in  his  Speech  in  Parliament,' 
says ;  "  This  is  that  which  I  am  not  satisfied  in, 
that  a  certain  number  of  men  should  usurp  to  them- 
selves to  form  certain  prayers  and  forms  for  divine 
service,  and,  .  .  .  under  the  name  of  the  church,  en- 
join them  upon  all  persons,  upon  all  occasions  to 
be  used,  and  none  other."  Cotton,  in  his  Reply  to 
Ball,^  argues  that  a  read  prayer  is  no  more  his  prayer 
than  a  read  sermon  is  his  preaching.  He  also  says,* 
"  A  set  form  of  prayer,  prescribed  to  me  for  my 
prayer,  maketh  it  to  me  a  will-worship."  Increase 
Mather,  in  his  Lawfulness  of  Common  Prayer 
Worship,  &c.  maintains  ®  that  its  origin  is  popish 
and  heathenish ;  "^  that  it  violates  the  word  of  God, 
by  omitting  some  words,  and  putting  others  in  their 
stead ;  and  ^  that  it  advances  the  Apocrypha  before 
the  Holy  Scriptures. 

»  In  Han.  i.  115,  116.  *  lb.  375,  376 ;  and  Works,  iii.  21—26. 
=»  lb.  ii.  134.    *  lb.  158.    *  lb.  162.    ^  Page  2.   '  Page  13.    »  Page  14. 

PRAYER  prescribed^  may  it  be  lawfully  joined 
in  ?  —  Lord  Say,  in  his  Speech  in  Parliament,* 
maintains  that  it  may  be  with  those  who  do  not 
hold  it  indispensable.  So  hold  all  Congregational- 
ists,  in  distinction  from  rigid  Separatists.  The 
Common  Prayer  Unmasked  maintains  the  negative, 
from  the  name,  matter,  and  original  of  it;  the  ridi- 
culous manner  of  using  it,  and  the  evil  effects  of  it. 

^  In  Han.  ii.  134,  135. 
27 


314  PREACH. 

PRAYER    prescribed    unprofitable.  Jacob's 

Church,  in  their  Confession,  art.  xxi.,^  say :  '•  Every 
form  of  prayer  prescribed  by  men  is  not  absolutely 
nor  simply  a  sin  ;  yet ...  it  is  not  so  profitable,  but 
rather  hurtful,  in  many  cases  of  it,  as  making  holy 
zeal  and  other  gifts  of  the  Spirit  in  many  to  lan- 
guish." The  Apologetical  Narrative  says :  ^  "  We 
practise,  without  condemning  others,  what  all  sides 
do  allow,  public  prayers  by  ministers  out  of  their 
own  gifts."  Cotton  Mather  ^  shows  that  "  Christ 
never  provided  a  prayer-book,  but  a  Bible,  for  his 
people." 

>  In  Han.  i.  299.    ^  ib.  ii.  225.     =»  Eat.  Dis.  48—51. 

PREACH,  ivlio  may  ?  —  Lord  King,  in  his  In- 
quiry,^ shows  that,  in  the  ancient  churches,  laymen 
preached  by  leave  of  the  bishops ;  and  he  quotes  a 
letter  from  Alexander,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and 
Theoclestus  of  Csesarea  to  Demetrius  of  Alexan- 
dria, defending  this  practice  in  the  case  of  Origen, 
who,  at  the  desire  of  the  bishops,  preached  and  ex- 
pounded the  Scriptures,  though  (in  his  language) 
not  yet  in  holy  orders.  Hooker's  Survey  ^  asserts 
that  a  man  may  preach  as  a  gifted  Christian  with- 
out pastoral  power.  Dr.  Stephen  Moore,  preacher 
to  parliament,^  and  the  Savoy  Confession,^  main- 
tain the  same  doctrine.  Eaton  and  Taylor,  in  their 
Defence,^  say :  "  Gifted  men,  not  ministers,  may 
preach."  Acts  xi.  19;  viii.  14.  The  Army  Scru- 
ples^ assert  that  all  men  may  read  the  Scriptures, 
and  apply  the  sense  for  edifying.  They  that  were 
scattered  abroad,  and  went  everywhere  preaching 


PREACH.  315 

the  word,  were  not  all  ministers.  The  apostles 
"  never  forbade  any  to  preach,  but  her  that  preached 
by  the  spirit  of  the  devil ; "  and  rejoiced  when  Christ 
was  preached,  even  of  envy.  There  is  no  difference 
between  exhorting  and  preaching.  If  two  persons 
may  exhort  each  other,  then  a  greater  number  may 
do  so.  The  petitioners  of  the  church  and  town  of 
Woburn  to  the  General  Court  "^  deny  that  it  always 
requires  a  council  to  determine  whether  a  man  may 
preach.  In  1630,  there  was  no  minister  in  the  First 
Church  in  Boston  ;  and  Governor  Winthrop,  Mr. 
Dudley,  and  Mr.  Nowel,  the  ruling  elder,  carried  on 
the  religious  service.^  John  Milton,  in  his  Treatise 
on  Christian  Doctrine,^  says  "  the  apostolical  insti- 
tution did  not  ordain  that  a  particular  individual, 
and  he  a  stipendiary,  should  have  the  sole  right  of 
speaking  from  a  higher  place,  but  that  each  believer 
in  turn  be  authorized  to  speak."  He  adds  :  ^^  "  Wo- 
men are,  however,  enjoined  to  keep  silence  in  the 
churches."  The  Apology  of  the  English  Church 
at  Amsterdam"  says:  "Discreet,  faithful,  and  able 
men,  (though)  not  yet  in  the  ministry,  may  preach 
the  gospel  and  the  whole  truth  of  God."  A  sermon 
was  preached  in  Plymouth,  Mass.,  and  printed  in 
England,  1622,  and  reprinted  in  Boston,  1724,  and 
Plymouth,  1785,  by  Robert  Cushman,  who  was  no 
minister.'^ —  See  Approbation  to  preach;  License  ; 
Prophesying. 

'  Part  ii.  14,  15.  »  Part  iv.  33.  '  In  Han.  iii.  96.  ■*  lb.  546. 
*  Page  118.  ^  Pages  3— 13.  '  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  i.  40. 
«  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  176.  »  Vol.  ii.  203.  ^'^  lb.  204.  "  Page  37. 
12  EUot,  Biog.  Diet.  143. 


316  ,  PRESBYTERY. 

PREACHING,  God^s  means  of  salvation.  —  Good- 
win has  devoted  the  first  chapter  of  his  seventh 
book  on  Church"  Government,  to  show  that  preach- 
ing, in  distinction  from  mere  reading  the  word,  is 
God's  instituted  appointment  for  the  salvation  of 
the  hearers ;  arguing  it  from  various  Scriptures. 

PREACHING,  is  it  lawful  to  hear ^  from  Christian 
errorists?  —  Robinson's  Posthumous  Treatise^  was 
written  on  purpose  to  establish  the  affirmative  of 
this  question.  It  should  be  noted  that  this  was  the 
dividing  point  between  the  Congregationalists  and 
the  rigid  Separatists.  Roger  Williams  first  broke 
with  the  churches  in  the  Bay,  because  they  would 
not  acknowledge  their  sin  in  having  heard  the 
Episcopal  ministers  in  England. 

» In  Han.  i.  447—461 ;  and  Works,  iii.  353—378. 

PRELACY  does  not  prevent  schism,  —  John  Mil- 
ton *  shows  that  it  was  not  set  up  for  this  end,  and 
accomplishes  quite  the  contrary  of  preventing  it. 

^  Treatise  against  Prelacy,  in  Works,  i.  100. 

PRESBYTERY,  what  —  In  the  Nonconformists' 
Directory  ^  it  is  said :  "  There  ought  to  be,  in  every 
particular  church,  a  presbytery,  which  is  a  consis- 
tory, and,  as  it  were,  a  senate  of  elders."  The  In- 
dependents in  the  Westminster  Assembly^  declare 
that  the  word  occurs  but  three  times  in  the  New 
Testament,  without  any  distinction  of  greater  or  less, 
as  consistory,  classis,  synod,  &c. ;  and  the  Scrip- 
tures hold  out  no  such  distinction  of  presbytery. 


PRESBYTERY.  317 

(See  Elders,  ruling.)  The  word  elder  means  sim- 
ply an  old  man.  Dr.  Stiles  ^  says :  "  However  fond 
they  (our  fathers)  were  of  the  power  of  presbyteries 
in  the  church,  they  were  very  opposite  to  the  powers 
of  classes,  councils,  and  synods  out  of  the  church.'* 
Their  idea  (i.e.  that  of  those  who  held  to  the  rule 
of  presbytery)  was  that  of  government  by  the  bench 
of  ruling  elders  in  the  church,  and  had  no  resem- 
blance but  in  name  to  the  rule  of  presbyteries,  by 
way  of  appeal  from  church-sessions. 

*  In  Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  440.  ^  In  Han.  ii.  491,  492.  ^  Conr. 
Serm.  60. 

PRESBYTERY,  use  o/.  —  Davenport,  in  his  Apo- 
logetical  Reply,*  says :  "  The  church  commits  those 
things  to  the  presbytery  which  it  cannot  commo- 
diously  do  by  itself."  Wise,  in  his  Vindication, 
everywhere  contends  that  it  is  necessary  to  the 
liberty  of  the  brethren ;  not  having  yet  discovered 
that  his  own  favorite  principle  of  pure  church  de- 
mocracy would  do  away  the  whole  need  of  presby- 
tery, in  the  sense  in  which  it  was  held  by  the  advo- 
cates of  a  mixed  church  government. 

»  Page  241. 

PRESBYTERY,  supposed  power  of.  —  Cotton,  in 
his  Constitution  of  a  Church,*  defines  it  to  be  "  to 
call  the  church  together,  and  deliver  the  counsel  of 
God  to  them  with  authority ;  to  prepare  matters  for 
the  church's  hearing,  and  to  propound  and  order 
them  in  the  assembly;  to  administer  ordination  and 
the  censures  ;  and  to  dismiss  the  assembly  with  a 
27* 


818  PRIVATE   JUDGMENT. 

blessing  in  the  name  of  the  Lord."  Cambridge 
Platform^  ascribes  to  it  the  same  power,  together 
with  that  of  being  moderators,  and  also  examining 
candidates  for  admission  and  for  office.  —  See  El- 
ders. 

1  In  Han.  iL  156.    *  Page  40. 

PRESBYTERY,  church  has  power  over. —  Richard 
Mather  maintains^  that  there  is  a  presbytery  in 
every  church  by  its  elders,  but  that  the  church  has 
the  ultimate  and  controlling  power  over  them. 
Cambridge  Platform  ^  gives  great  power  to  elders ; 
but,  giving  the  church  power  to  censure  and  depose 
one,  it  subjects  them,  necessarily,  to  an  appeal  to 
the  whole  body ;  they  only  ruling  for  the  sake  of 
order,  and  not  as  lords. 

»  Ch.  Gov.  and  Ch.  Gov.  49.    *  Chap.  x.  sec.  6—11. 

PRIESTS,  ministers  are  not  —  See  Ministers, 
not  successors  of  Jeioish  priests. 

PRINCIPLES  of  Congregationalism.  —  See  Con- 
gregationalism, epitome  of  principles  of. 

PRIVATE  JUDGMENT,  right  o/.  —  Neal^  makes 
this  one  of  the  leading  points  of  difference  between 
the  Puritans  and  Conformists,  at  the  time  of  the 
separation,  viz.  "  the  natural  right  of  every  man  to 
judge  for  himself,  and  make  profession  of  that  reli- 
gion he  apprehends  most  agreeable  to  truth,  so  far 
as  it  does  not  aft'ect  the  peace  and  safety  of  the 
government  they  live   under."     This  ground  has 


PROPHESYING.  819 

always  been  defended  by  Congregationalists,  and 
assailed  by  their  opponents.  —  See  Hanbury,  i.  41, 
53, 124, 171 ;  ii.  47. 

*  Hist.  Puritans,  i.  108. 

PROFESSION  o//ai7/i.—  Cambridge  Platform » 
asserts  that  this  should  be  made  by  members  on 
their  admission,  and  that  nothing  hinders  that  it 
should  be  made  on  their  being  received  from  other 
churches.  —  See  Confession  of  Faith  ;  Creeds  ; 
Members,  removing. 

*  Chap.  xii.  sect.  5, 6. 

PROPHESYING,  ordinary^  i.e.  expounding  the 
word.  —  In  1618  John  Robinson  published  his  "  Plea 
for  Prophesying,  or  Speaking  after  Sermon,  in  Re- 
ply to  Mr.  John  Yates  his  Monopoly."*  Punchard 
adds :  "  This  practice  was  continued  many  years  by 
the  Leyden  and  Plymouth  Church,  and  probably 
laid  the  foundation  for  the  religious  conference- 
meetings  now  so  common  among  Congregation- 
alists." In  the  Appendix  to  Mr.  Perkins,*  he  says, 
such  as  are  out  of  office  are  to  feed  the  flock  in 
the  exercise  of  prophesying,  which  is  proved  —  By 
examples  in  the  Jewish  church,  Luke  ii.  42,  46, 
47;  iv.  16,  18.  Acts  viii.  4;  xi.  19—21 ;  xiii.  14— 
16;  xviii.  24 — 26.  By  the  commands  of  Christ 
and  his  apostles,  Luke  ix.  1 ;  x.  1.  Rom.  xii.  9. 
1  Pet.  iv.  10,  11.  1  Cor.  xiv.  1.  By  prohibiting 
women,  not  extraordinarily  inspired,  to  teach  in  the 
church  ;  herein  liberty  being  given  to  men  their 
husbands,  and  others.    By  the  excellent  enas  which 


820  PROPnEstiNx:^. 

by  these  means  are  obtained.  Ainsworth,  in  his 
Communion  of  Saints,^  says  :  "  All  men  have  nqt 
only  the  liberty,  but  are  also  to  desire,  that  they 
may  prophesy,  i.e.  speak  to  the  church  to  edifica- 
tion, which  is  to  be  coveted  rather  than  other  spiri- 
tual gifts."  Robinson  advocates  the  same  in  his 
Answer  to  Helwisse.^  Jacob's  Church  Confession, 
art.  xviii.,*  says :  "  We  believe  that  the  sober,  dis- 
creet, orderly,  and  well-governed  exercise  of  ex- 
pounding and  applying  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  the 
congregation,  by  the  apostle  called  prophesying, 
and  allowed  by  him  to  every  other  understanding 
member  of  the  church  but  women,  is  lawful  now, 
convenient,  profitable,  yea,  sometimes  very  neces- 
sary also  in  divers  respects."  Johnson,  in  his  Chris- 
tian Plea,^  shows,  touching  the  divers  use  of  men's 
gifts,  that  they  may  be  used  either  in  office  or  out 
of  office,  Rom.  xii.  6 — 8.  Hanbury  has^  a  long 
list  of  controversial  works  on  this  point.  Goodwin 
shows  ®  that  by  ordinary  prophesying  is  meant 
"  speaking  out  of  the  word  to  men's  instruction. 
In  1  Cor.  xiv.  1 — 3,  prophesying  is  taken  in  oppo- 
sition to  gifts  extraordinary,  and  is  put  for  the  ordi- 
nary expounding  of  the  Scriptures;  the  word  pro- 
phesy being  not  taken  always  to  foretell,  but  also  to 
declare,  as  Exod.  vii.  1."  Owen,  in  his  Duty  of 
Pastors  and  People,  chap,  vii.^  shows  that  private 
Christians  have  a  right  to  make  known  whatever 
is  revealed  to  them  out  of  God's  word,  and,  if 
called  in  Providence,  to  preach  the  gospel.  Cotton 
Mather  ^"^  shows  that  in  his  time  meetings  for  this 
purpose  were  kept  up  at  private  houses,  after  the 


PROPHESYING.  321 

manner  of  conference-meetings  at  the  present  day. 
"Winthrop"  cites  prominent  instances  of  the  per- 
formance of  this  duty  in  the  New  England  churches. 
So  Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing;*^  and  Upham, 
in  the  Appendix  to  his  Dedication  Sermon.^^  Gov, 
Bradford's  Letter  ^"^  quotes  Robinson's  Apology, 
page  45 :  "  First,  in  all  churches  ...  let  the  order 
of  prophesying  be  observed,  according  to  Paul's 
institution.  Unto  this  are  to  be  received,  .  .  .  yea, 
even'  of  the  multitude,  who  are  willing  to  confer 
their  gift,  received  of  God,  to  the  common  utility 
of  the  church."  Pierce,  in  his  Vindication  of  Dis- 
senters,^* says  Archbishop  Grindal  wrote  the  queen 
a  letter  in  defence  of  prophesyings,  for  which  he 
was  confined  to  his  house,  and  sequestered  six 
months.  Cotton  Mather  asserts  *^  that  the  custom 
of  asking  questions  after  sermon,  which  had  be- 
come the  occasion  of  many  contentions,  underwent 
the  condemnation  of  the  Synod  of  1637.  —  See 
Preach,  who  may  ?  ' 

'  In  Han.  i.  354—358;  and  Works,  iii.  287;  and  Punchard's 
Hist.  343.  2  Punchard's  Hist.  353  ;  and  Works,  iii.  432,  433." 
3  In  Han.  i.  281.  ■*  ib.  261 ;  and  Works,  iii.  134.  »  lb.  298.  «  ib. 
317.  "^  lb.  356,  note.  «  Ch.  Gov.  279.  »  Works,  xix.  43—47. 
i"Ilat:  Dis.  192.  "Vol.  i.  91,  92,  130.  ^' In  Hist.  Soc.  Col. 
series  iii.  vol.  iii.  75.  "  Page  52.  **  In  Young's  Pilgrims,  422. 
15  Page  95.    ^^  Magnalia,  ii.  446. 

PROPHESYING  regulated  by  teaching  officers.— 
Robinson,  in  his  Answer  to  Helwisse,^  says :  "  The 
officers,  after  their  ordinary  teaching,  exhort  to  the 
use  and  exercise  of  the  like  liberty  (moving  and 
propounding  questions,  and  exhorting  the  people), 


822  PROPHESYING. 

and  so,  as  there  is  occasion,  open  and  explain 
things  obscure  and  doubtful,  reprove  things  un- 
sound and  impertinent,  and  so  order,  moderate,  and 
determine  the  whole  exercise.  In  this,  I  suppose, 
it  appears  unto  all  men  that  the  officers  govern." 
After  what  is  quoted  from  the  Appendix  to  Mr. 
Perkins  in  the  last  article,  he  adds  :  "  This  exercise 
is  to  be  performed  after  the  public  ministry  by  the 
teachers,  and  under  their  direction  and  moderation, 
whose  duty  is,  if  any  thing  be  obscure,  to  open  it ; 
if  doubtful,  to  clear  it;  if  unsound,  to  refute  it;  if 
imperfect,  to  supply  what  is  wanting,  as  they  are 
able."  In  his  Apology,^  he  shows  that  they  who 
speak  should  do  it  to  edification,  and  first  be  al- 
lowed by  the  judgments  of  ministers  and  others. 
Cotton,  in  his  Constitution  of  a  Church,^  says,  after 
prophesying  by  the  ministers,  "  if  the  time  permit, 
the  elders  may  call  on  any  other  of  the  brethren  to 
speak  a  word  of  exhortation  to  the  people."  Welde, 
in  his  Answer  to  Rathband,^  argues  that  it  is  not 
preaching  with  authority,  and  must  not  be  practised 
by  those  not  invited  by  the  elders.  So  Goodwin 
and  Nye,  in  their  preface  to  Cotton's  Keys.*  Hub- 
bard says  ^  inaccurately,  as  we  see  above  from  Cot- 
ton's own  hand,  that  prophesying  was  never  prac- 
tised in  any  of  the  churches  except  Plymouth ; 
Cotton  being  jealous  of  it.  Mitchell,  in  his  Guide,^ 
seems  to  feel  great  horror  about  lay-preaching,  yet 
confesses  it  difficult  to  find  where  the  "  forbidden 
joint"  lies;  but,  on  the  whole,  concludes  that  it 
consists  in  an  ordinary  layman  or  a  theological  stu- 
dent taking:  a  text,  and  making:  a  formal  discourse. 


REPENTANCE.  323 

But  he  does  not  inform  us  whether  the  sin  consists 
in  the  text  or  the  formal  method,  or  the  theologico- 
chemical  compound.  Laymen,  he  admits,  may- 
pray,  exhort,  read,  and  comment  on  the  Bible,  warn 
the  impenitent,  reprove  sin,  and  address  a  promis- 
cuous assembly ;  but  they  must  not  preach.  —  See 
Approbation;  License;  Vreach,  ivho  may ? 

iln  Punchard's  Hist.  338;   Han.  i.  261;  and  Works,  iii.  135. 

*  In  Han.  i.  382  ;  and  Works,  iii.  55.  ^  In  Han.  ii.  156.  *  lb.  316, 
334.     =  Page  9.     °  Hist.  Mass.  65.     '  Pages  273—277. 

PULPIT  controlled  by  the  minister.  —  Mitchell, 
in  his  Guide,^  reasons  well  on  the  right  of  a  pastor, 
while  he  continues  such,  to  tha  control  of  the  pul- 
pit untrammelled  by  the  people. 

»  Pages  158,  159. 

RECOMMENDATION,  need  of.  —  Cambridge 
Platform  ^  states,  that  members  unknown,  and  re- 
moving for  a  time,  need  letters  of  recommendation  ; 
and  those  permanently  removing  should  have  letters 
of  dismission.  Cotton  Mather  asserts"  that  pastors 
usually  gave  letters  of  recommendation  to  persons 
travelling,  but  admitted  to  occasional  communion 
any  who  had  any  living  testimony  of  their  having 
been  communicants  in  any  of  the  reformed  churches. 
See  Dismission;  Members. 

*  Chap.  xiii.  sect.  8,  9  ;  and  chap.  xv.  sect.  2.    '  Rat.  Dis.  136,  137. 

REPENTANCE  of  offenders,  how  manifested.  — 
The  True  Description  of  the  Visible  Church  ^  says 
the  repentance  of  the  party  must  be  proportionate 


324  RESISTANCE. 

to  the  offence,  namely,  if  the  offence  be  public,  pub- 
lic ;  if  private,  private ;  humbled,  submissive,  sor- 
rowful, unfeigned.  Cotton  Mather  ^  affirms  that  it 
is  sometimes  sufficient  to  confess  before  the  church. 
Dr.  Hopkins'  maintains  that  it  must  always  be 
public;  because  the  offender,  by  his  transgression, 
put  out  his  light  before  the  world.  —  See  Excom- 
munication, public. 

» In  Punchard's  Hist.  371,  372.     »  i^at.  Dis.  144.     ^  Syst.  ii.  360. 

REPENTANCE,  churches  judges  of  Us  genuine- 
ness. —  Goodwin^  shows  that  this  is  indispensable 
to  avoid  gross  imposition  of  offenders. 

i  Ch.  Gov.  200. 

REPENTANCE,  if  manifested^  may  a  church  still 
exclude  a  flagrant  offender? —  Owen,  in  his  Nature 
of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  x.^  answers  this  question 
in  the  negative,  unless  they  may  reject  whom  Christ 
receives.     The  end  of  discipline  is  already  attained. 

1  Works,  XX.  560. 

RESISTANCE  to  oppression  lawful  —  This  was 
the  doctrine  of  the  separation,  and  of  all  the  Inde- 
pendents ;  else  Congregational  churches  had  never 
outlived  the  storm  of  persecution.  Bridge,  in  his 
Truth  of  the  Times  Vindicated  (Answer  to  Fearne),* 
shows  the  correctness  of  this  doctrine  in  the  pending 
struggle  with  Charles  I.  He  shows  that  the  first 
source  of  civil  power  under  God  is  in  the  whole 
people;  that  God  appointed  government,  and  left 
the  children  of  men  free  to  set  up  any  way  and 


RESISTANCE.  325 

form  of  government,  still  making  the  people  the 
first  receptacle  of  civil  power ;  that  people  oppressed 
have  other  "  remedy  than  crying  and  tears  "  (denied 
by  his  opponent),  though  "  war  is  the  worst  of  evils, 
and  not  to  be  undertaken  but  to  prevent  gravissi- 
mum  malum.  We  say,  if  the  prince  do  not  perform 
his  trust,  the  people  may  look  to  their  own  safety." 
Secretary  Cooke  alludes,  on  the  scaffold,  to  his 
Monarchy  No  Creature  of  God,^  and  says  the  mo- 
narchists will  be  ashamed  to  oppose  it.  He  assumes 
that  monarchical  government  is  no  creature  of  God, 
and  that  the  execution  of  the  late  king  was  one  of 
the  fattest  sacrifices  Queen  Justice  ever  had.  In 
Mr.  Mayhew's  Sermon  to  the  West  Church,  Boston, 
on  Lord's  day  after,  Jan.  30,  1750,''  he  confutes  the 
doctrine  of  passive  submission  to  all  who  would 
bear  rule.  He  shows  that  the  duty  of  subjection 
to  the  higher  powers  is  founded  solely  on  their 
being  the  ministers  of  God  for  good  to  the  people ; 
and  that,  when  governments  fail  to  do  this,  it  is 
duty  to  resist.  Pierce,  in  his  Vindication  of  Dis- 
senters,* affirms  that  it  is  a  doctrine  of  the  church 
of  England,  that  the  magistrate  is  not  upon  any 
account  whatever  to  be  resisted.  Dr.  Ames,  in  his 
Cases  of  Conscience,  says :  *  "  War  in  the  Scrip- 
tures is  reckoned  among  the  heaviest  of  God's 
judgments,"  but  "  is  not  always  unlawful ;  ...  if  so 
...  it  had  never  been  allowed  of  God  in  the  Old 
Testament.  .  .  .  John  Baptist  exhorted  soldiers  not 
to  cast  away  their  arms,  but  to  use  them  rightly." 
Bridge,  in  his  Sermon  to  the  Volunteers  of  Norwich 
and  Great  Yarmouth,  says,^  if  parliament  may  send 
28 


826  RESISTANCE. 

one  sergeant-at-arms  for  one  transgressor,  they  may 
send  a  thousand  for  a  thousand  such.  Burroughs, 
in  his  Sermon  to  Parliament/  says :  "  When  men 
in  authority  command  any  thing  of  their  own  wills, 
which  is  no  law,  it  is  not  authority  which  doth  com- 
mand it.  In  this  case,  there  is  no  resisting  autho- 
rity at  all."  Taylor,  in  his  Vindication  of  Dissen- 
ters,^ says :  "  We  would  not  swallow  their  doctrine 
of  passive  obedience  and  non-resistance,  as  they 
stated  it,  in  all  cases  whatsoever.  .  .  .  Why  did  not 
the  bishops  plead  for  it,  when  the  Prince  of  Orange 
was  coming  over?  We  should  not  then  have  had 
the  name  of  a  Protestant  Church,  nor  the  shadow 
of  an  English  parliament.  If  I  can  honestly  help  it, 
I  will  never,  never  be  a  slave  to  Kirk  or  Keysar." 
Withers,  in  his  History  of  Resistance  in  the  Church 
of  England,  show^s  that  they  have  always  held  such 
resistance  lawful.  And  he  asserts  ^  that  the  late 
Lord  Chief  Justice  Holt,  at  the  abdication  of  James 
II.,  maintained  that  "  he  that  hath  a  trust,  acting 
contrary,  is  a  disclaimer  of  the  trust."  He  main- 
tains ^°  that  exousia  means  lawful  power,  to  resist 
which  is  a  damnable  sin.  "  'Tis  sin  to  resist  the 
mayor  in  the  lawful  execution  of  his  office ;  but, 
should  he  fall  to  cutting  throats  and  firing  houses, 
...  he  may  be  resisted."  Paul's  doctrine  of  non- 
resistance  to  the  powers  that  be  is  limited,  like 
Christ's,  to  resist  not  evil.  Bradbury,  in  his  Sermon 
entitled  the  Ass  and  the  Serpent  (from  Gen.  xlix. 
15,  18),  says:"  "The  foundation  of  all  passive 
obedience  is  laid  in  stupidity."  And''  "  God  may 
deliver  us  up  to  the  will  of  evil  men ;  but  to  say 


RESISTANCE.  327 

that  he  would  have  us  deliver  ourselves  up  is  to 
blaspheme  his  empire."  He  represents  Issachar  as 
stupidly  crouching  under  burdens,  when  he  had 
power  to  resist  them.  He  shows'^  what  they  got 
who  threw  themselves  into  the  hands  of  the  tyrant 
Sennacherib,  and  says  :  ^*  "  There  is  nothing,  in  any 
one  doctrine  of  Christianity,  that  will  tie  up  the 
hands  of  an  injured  people.  He  that  hath  tasted 
that  the  Lord  is  gracious  must  have  pity  to  the 
desolations  of  mankind:  he  cannot  endure  to  see 
that  nature  marred  by  a  tyrant  that  hath  been 
honored  by  a  Saviour.  ...  As  the  kingdom  of 
Christ  extends  itself,  it  will  proclaim  liberty  to  the 
captives."  In  the  preface  to  his  Lawfulness  of  Re- 
sisting Tyrants,  he  says :  "  If  a  prince  break  the 
fundamental  laws  that  secure  the  rights  and  liber- 
ties of  his  people,  'tis  just  for  them  to  take  their 
remedy."  He  adds,^^  the  people  have  a  right  in 
themselves  to  dethrone  a  tyrant.  And  ^^  "  David 
could  say,  'there  is  no  wrong  in  mine  hand'  while 
there  was  a  sword  in  it."  ^^  They  that  out  of 
weakness  were  made  strong  put  to  flight  the  armies 
of  the  aliens.  "  They  bathe  their  sword  in  heaven, 
and  it  takes  a  celestial  edge."  In  his  Non-resistance 
Without  Priestcraft,^^  he  says  the  Scriptures  state 
the  case  in  this  view :  If  God  hath  given  us  no 
capacity  of  resisting  a  tyrant,  we  must  submit  to 
it.  If  he  hath,  it  is  throwing  away  his  favor  not 
to  use  it.  There  is  nothinj?  ties  the  hands  of  an 
injured  people  but  necessity.  No  law  of  God  ever 
did  make  them  slaves.  Davenport,  in  his  Royal 
Edict   for    Military  Exercises,  says :  *^    "  Without 


S28  RESISTANCE. 

arms,  and  the  exercise  of  them,  the  Commonwealth 
cannot  be  safe  from  dangers  without.  Neither 
God's  power,  nor  his  purpose,  nor  his  promise,  se- 
cures any  man  in  the  neglect  of  means.  He  did 
not  feed  with  manna  in  Canaan."  Mr.  Emerson  in 
his  election  sermon,  entitled  Piety  and  Arms,  says :  ^^ 
"  War  between  states  is  justified  for  the  same  rea- 
sons "  as  self-defence  between  individuals.  Mr. 
Fish,  in  his  Art  of  War  Useful  and  Necessary, 
says  ^^  the  art  of  war  is  lawful  when  it  serves  the 
defence  of  human  rights,  and  not  when  it  serves 
the  purposes  of  sordid  ambition.  He  proves  from 
several  considerations  the  absolute  necessity  for  a 
Christian  people  to  learn  the  art  of  war,  even  from 
the  command.  Thou  shalt  not  kill.  If  we  do  not 
use  means  to  preserve  life,  we  are  accessory  to  its 
destruction.  The  art  is  none  the  less  useful  be- 
cause abused.  Corbet,  in  his  Principles  and  Prac- 
tices of  Several  Nonconformists,"'  says :  '•  When 
men's  commands  counteract  the  commands  of  God, 
it  is  God  and  not  man  that  must  have  the  pre-emi- 
nence in  our  obedience."  Cotton  Mather,  in  his 
Sermon  to  an  Artillery  Company,^^  says :  "  God  is 
the  God  of  armies,  but  is  never  called  the  God  of 
thieves  or  the  God  of  murderers."  In  his  Discourse 
to  Part  of  the  Soldiers  engaged  in  the  Just  War 
against  the  Northern  and  Eastern  Indians,  he  says : 
"  Gentlemen,  it  is  the  war  of  the  Lord  you  are  en- 
gaged in."  R.  Williams,  in  his  Bloody  Tenet,^* 
says :  "  It  is  necessary  with  civil  and  earthly  wea- 
pons to  defend  the  innocent  and  rescue  the  op- 
pressed"    Samuel  Adams  exclaimed,  on  the  19th 


REVEREND.  829 

of  April,  1775 :  "  This  is  a  glorious  day  for  Ame- 
rica."" Mr.  Davenport  preached  about  the  time 
of  the  arrival  of  the  pursuers  of  the  regicide  judges, 
from  Isa.  xvi.  3,  4.  "Bewray  not  him  that.wan- 
dereth ;  let  mine  outcasts  dwell  with  thee,"  &c."^ 
Hugh  Peters  led  a  brigade  into  Ireland,  and  came 
off  victorious."  Dr.  Emmons  -^  says  :  How  many 
have  believed  in  passive  obedience  and  non-resist- 
ance because  it  was  practised  (?)  under  the  law! 
Robert  Hall,  in  his  Village  Preaching,^^  shows  that 
there  will  be  resistance  to  penal  laws  when  they  do 
not  harmonize  with  public  sentiment,  nor  approve 
themselves  to  conscience.  —  See  Government,  civil. 

»  In  Han.  ii.  190—197.  ^  lb.  iii.  564.  ^  in  Appendix  to  Neal'a 
Puritans,  ii.  527—540.  ■*  Page  304.  ^  Page  184.  ^  Page  18. 
'  Page  32.  ^  Pref.  i.— xii.  ^  Page  19.  ^"  lb.  23.  "  Page  3. 
^2  lb.  8.  "lb.  12,  13.  **Ib.  20.  '^  Page  2.  ^^  Pages  9,  11. 
"  Page  22.  "*  Page  4.  ^^  Page  8.  ^o  p^ge  14.  ^i  p^gg  6. 
22  Page  9.  23  Page  18.  ^4  Page  34.  ^b  Eliot's  Biog.  Diet.  10. 
28  lb.  150,  et  al.  27  lb.  374.  28  Vol.  v.  439.  29  Works,  ii.  191— 
199. 

RESTORATION  of  penitent  offenders.  —  Lord 
King,^  after  detailing  the  horrors  of  an  ancient  ex- 
communication, shows  how  the  penitents  were  re- 
stored, after  a  most  abject  humiliation,  in  amazing 
contrast  with  our  Saviours  direction.  And  if  he 
repent,  forgive  him ;  and  Paul's,  Ye  ought  to  for- 
give him,  lest  such  an  one  be  swallowed  up  with 
much  sorrow. 

*  Enquiry,  part  i.  125. 

REVEREND.  —  Owen,  in  bis  Nature  of  Schism/ 

28« 


330  SAVOY   CONFESSION. 

speaks  disparagingly  of  the  title,  saying  that  he  had 
valued  it  little,  since  he  considered  that  saying  of 
Luther :  Nunquam  periclitatur  religio  nisi  inter  Re- 
verendissimos.  —  See  D.D. 

*■  In  Han.  iii.  472. 

SABBATH  a  proper  time  for  church  discipline.  — 
Ainsworth,  in  his  Reply  to  Johnson,^  says :  "  The 
church  judgments  are  the  Lord's  works,  not  ours ; 
therefore  fittest  to  be  done  on  the  Lord's  day.  .  .  . 
All  churches  baptize  on  the  Sabbath,  and  excom- 
municate on  the  Sabbath :  why  should  not  the  case 
be  heard,  as  well  as  judgment  executed,  on  that 
day? 

» In  Han.  i.  251. 

SABBATH-SCHOOLS.  — The  Rev.  T.  Bobbins, 
D.D.,  in  his  Address  at  Williams  College,  p.  40, 
says  that  the  earliest,  of  which  he  has  seen  an  au- 
thentic account,  was  at  Plymouth  in  1669. —  See 
Intermissions,  Sabbath. 

SAINT,  title  of  avoided.  —  Hutchinson,  in  his 
History  of  Massachusetts,^  says  the  New  England 
settlers  never  used  the  appellation  of  saint^  to  avoid 
approbation  of  the  Pope  and  his  power  of  canoniza- 
tion. 

»  Vol.  i.  378. 

SAVOY  CONFESSION.— -MitchelP  says  of  the 
Westminster  and  Savoy  Confessions :  "  They  never 
had  the  authority  of  standards  with  us,  as  some 
have  supposed.  . . .  They  were  consented  to  for  sub- 


SCHISM.  S31 

stance  of  doctrine  by  the  New  England  churches. 
.  .  .  They  were  never,  to  my  knowledge,  set  up  as 
standards,  and  made  of  the  like  authority  with  us, 
as  confessions  are  with  other  communions.  . . .  They 
have  the  authority  of  truth  with  us,  so  far  as  they 
may  agree  with  the  Bible.  ...  They  have  no  other 
authority  than  this.  The  same  may  be  said  of  our 
Platforms :  they  are  lights  which  all  are  free  to  use 
or  not  as  they  please."  —  See  Authority,  humany 
discarded;  Platforms,  of  what  authority;  Scrip- 
tures a  sufficient  guide  to  order. 

^  Guide,  55,  56. 

SCHISM,  2^;/ia^  —  Owen,  in  his  True  Nature  of 
Schism,^  says  that,  "in  its  ecclesiastical  sense,  it 
denotes  difference  of  mind  and  judgment,  with 
troubles  ensuing  thereon,  amongst  men  met  in  some 
one  assembly,  about  compassing  a  common  end  or 
design."  The  arbitrary  definitions  of  men,  with 
their  superstructures  and  inferences,  we  are  not  con- 
cerned in.  He  shows  ^  that  the  definition  of  the 
word  is  rending.  We  hear  nothing  of  schism  in 
Scripture,  save  in  the  case  of  the  church  in  Corinth. 
It  refers  to  causeless  disputes  among  brethren,  and 
not  to  refusing  subjection  to  bishops,  councils, 
classes,  &c.  There  is  no  mention  of  any  with- 
drawing from  the  church,  but  not  forbearing  and 
forgiving  one  another.  Withdrawing  is  not  schism ; 
nor  is  refusing  to  hold  communion,  nor  even  de- 
parture from  a  church,  provided  it  be  done  without 
a  variance,  judging  and  condemning  others.  He 
shows  that  the  Independents  are  willing  to  walk 


332  SCHISM. 

with  the  church  of  England  in  all  things  where 
their  light  will  afford  mutual  peace.  In  his  Review 
of  the  Nature  of  Schism,'  he  says  it  is  impossible 
that  a  man  can  be  a  schismatic  but  by  virtue  of 
his  being  a  member.  And,*  "  Schism  consists  in 
division  in  a  church,  and  not  in  separation  from  it;" 
and  this  is  what  the  apostle  dehorts  from  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  the  only  place  where 
schism  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  Davenport,  in 
his  Apologetical  Reply,*  argues  that  schism  some- 
times means  unjust  secession  from  a  church,  1  John 
ii.  19  (?),  and  sometimes  contention  in  a  church, 
1  Cor.  xi.  18.  He  shows  ^  that  secession  is  some- 
times occasioned  by  injurious  dealing  of  others. 
Hall's  Puritans  and  their  Principles^  shows  that  it 
is  not  schism  to  break  away  from  churches,  but  to 
make  divisions  in  them.  Taylor,  in  his  Vindication 
of  Dissenters,^  shows  that  it  is  the  church  of  Eng- 
land which  causes  schism,  by  cutting  off  all  who 
affirm  that  there  is  any  thing  wrong  in  the  Com- 
mon Prayer  or  the  Thirty-nine  Articles.  The  pre- 
face of  Defence  of  Mr.  Henry's  Enquiry  into  the 
Nature  of  Schism  says  that  it  consists,  not  in  sepa- 
ration from  communion,  but  in  violation  of  love 
and  charity.  Rev.  C.  Turner,  in  his  Anniversary 
Plymouth  Sermon,^  says :  "  If  the  church  of  Eng- 
land was  schismatical  in  leaving  Rome,  we  could 
heartily  wish  they  had  carried  their  schism  to  a 
greater  length."  In  the  Troubles  in  Frankfort,^" 
Calvin's  definition  of  schism  was  asserted  to  be 
a  cutting  off  from  the  body  of  the  church.  Mr. 
,Whittingham    answered,  "  that  he  would   prove 


SCRIPTURES.  833 

that  definition  to  be  false, .  .  .  and  none  of  Calvin's ; 
for  if  every  cutting  off  from  the  body  should  be 
schism,  then  you  and  all  who  have  once  sworn  to 
the  Pope,  and  now  have  refused  him,  are  schisma- 
tics." 

'-  In  Han.  iii.  439.  =  in  Works,  xix.  122—127,  and  222,  225. 
3  In  Han.  iii.  444.  ^  lb.  454,  455.  *  Page  26.  »  lb.  27.  '  Page 
279.    "Page  118.     ^  Page  20.     i°  Page  57. 

SCRIPTURES  a  sufficient  guide  to  order.  —  Pun- 
chard  ^  says  this  principle  was  early  lost  sight  of, 
and  has  never  been  fully  regained.  He  asserts, 
however,^  that,  between  the  ninth  and  the  thirteenth 
centuries,  there  were  various  bodies  of  dissenters 
who  maintained  that  the  Scriptures  are  an  infalli- 
ble and  sufficient  guide  to  the  church  of  Christ; 
and  that  he  has  given  his  church  no  authority  to 
make  laws  for  the  government  of  his  people,  but 
only  to  execute  such  as  he  has  given  in  his  word. 
He  shows  the  difference  between  the  Court  Refor- 
mers and  the  Puritans  to  be  substantially  this  : 
The  one  held  the  absolute  right  of  the  prince  to 
determine  rules  and  ceremonies  ;  the  other,  that 
nothing  should  be  required  which  was  not  deduci- 
ble  from  the  Scriptures,  and  no  church  officers  be 
allowed  which  are  not  recognized  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. Goodwin  ^  shows  that  there  is  much  in 
the  New  Testament  purposely  written  for  the  go- 
vernment of  the  churches,  and  the  Scriptures  are 
perfect  in  whatever  they  undertake  to  do,  while 
they  afford  us  direct  rules  on  the  subject.  Cart- 
wright,  in  his  Controversy  with  Archbishop  Whit- 


384  SCRIPTURES. 

gift/  maintained,  in  opposition  to  Whitgift,  that 
the  Scriptures  are  not  only  a  standard  of  doctrine, 
but  of  government.  The  same  doctrine  is  distinctly 
stated  in  the  Nonconformists'  Directory;*  in  Ja- 
cob's Church  Confession,  art.  ii.  ;^  Johnson's  Trea- 
tise on  the  Reformed  Churches ;  ^  and  the  Apolo- 
getical  Narrative  of  the  Independents  in  the  West- 
minster Assembly.^  Burton,  in  his  Answer  to 
Prynne's  Twelve  Considerable  Questions,^  says : 
"  The  Scriptures  hold  forth  to  us  but  only  one  form 
of  church  government  and  discipline,  which  ought 
not  to  be  altered  according  to  the  diversity  of  hu- 
man laws,  as  you  affirm."  So,  too,  Burrough's 
Irenicum  ;  ^°  Bartlett's  Model.^'  The  Congrega- 
tional Union  of  England  and  Wales  say,  in  their 
Principles  of  Church  Order :  '^^  "  The  New  Testa- 
ment contains,  either  in  form  of  express  statute, 
or  in  the  example  and  practice  of  the  apostolic 
churches,  all  the  principles  of  order  and  discipline 
requisite  to  constituting  and  governing  Christian 
societies."  Cambridge  Platform  ^^  says  :  "  The 
parts  of  church  government  are  all  of  them  exactly 
described  in  the  word  of  God,  ...  so  that  it  is  not 
left  in  the  power  of  men,  officers,  churches,  or  any 
state  in  the  world,  to  add,  diminish,  or  alter  any 
thing,  in  the  least  measure,  therein."  Hooker,  in 
his  Survey,^*  holds  nearly  the  same  language,  and 
adds:  It  is  not  in  the  power  of  man  to  appoint  an 
officer  or  an  ordinance  in  his  church.  So  Samuel 
Mather,  in  his  Apology.^*  Hall,  in  his  Puritans 
and  their  Principles,^^  quotes  from  the  present  good 
Bishop  of  Connecticut,  commiserating  those  "  who 


\ 


SEALS.    ,  385 

have  the  Bible  alone  for  their  standard  of  faith ; " 
but  a  reviewer  insists  that  it  may  yet  be  as  well  to 
hold  on  to  the  Bible  till  the  good  bishop  provides  us 
with  something  really  better.  Ames,  in  his  Mar- 
row of  Sacred  Divinity/^  says :  "  Ministers  ought 
not  to  do  any  thing  in  the  church  which  they  have 
not  prescribed  to  them  in  the  Scriptures."  See  the 
Third  Petition  of  the  Exiles  and  others  to  King 
James,  on  his  Answer  to  the  First  Petition,  in  Han. 
i.  113 ;  Mauduit's  Case  of  Dissenting  ministers, 
quoted  under  art.  Creeds;  Dr.  Kippis's,  also  ib. ; 
Punchard's  View,  30.  —  See  Government,  church; 
Churches,  instituted  bodies  ;  Legislation. 

>  Hist.  39.  2  lb.  109,  234,  235.  ^  Ch.  Gov.  13,  14,  16,  27. 
*  In  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  123.  ^  Ib.  ii.  440.  «  In  Han.  i.  294.  '  Ib. 
315.  «Ib.  ii.  224.  ^  Ib.  388.  ^'^  Ib.  iii.  115.  "  Ib.  242.  »2  i^, 
599.  '3  Chap.  i.  sect.  3.  '^  Part  i.  5,  6.  »'  Pages  2,  3.  ^^  Page 
59.     "  Page  155. 

SEALS,  tvhat.  —  Congregationalists  agree  that 
the  seals  of  the  covenant  are  only  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper. 

SEALS,  may  a  church  authorize  others  than  teach- 
ing'  elders  to  administer? — This  has  ever  been  a 
disputed  point.  The  Savoy  Confession,  chapter  on 
Listitution  of  Churches,  art.  xvi.,  says  :^  '•  But  where 
there  are  no  teaching  officers,  none  may  administer 
the  seals,  nor  may  the  church  authorize  any  to  do 
so."  With  this  agrees  Hooker.^  Watts,  in  his 
Foundation  of  a  Christian  Church,'  says  :  "  The 
church  may  appoint  private  members  to  administer 


336  OTPARATION. 

seals  rather  than  to  neglect  them.  So  taught  Sa- 
muel Mather.  —  See  Baptism,  luho  may  administer 
it  ?  Lord's  Supper,  may  any  but  ordained  ministers 
administer  ?  Ministers,  may  they  administer  seals 
where  they  are  not  pastors  ? 

*  In  Han.  iii.  547.    *  Survey,  part  iii.  9.    '  "Works,  iii.  222. 

SEALS,  all  members  have  a  right  to.  —  Hooker  * 
shows  that  even  the  members  of  the  church  of  Sar- 
dis  had  this  outward  right. 

*  Survey,  part  iii.  10,  11. 

SEPARATION,  what— The  Answer  of  the  In- 
dependents in  the  Grand  Committee  of  the  West- 
minster Assembly  ^  says :  "  If  the  purest  churches 
in  the  world  should  impose,  as  a  condition  of  re- 
ceiving the  Lord's  Supper,  any  one  thing  which 
tender  consciences  cannot  join  in ;  if  they  remove 
from  these  churches,  and  have  liberty  from  a  state 
to  gather  other  churches,  this  is  no  separation." 
John  Howe^  archly  compares  the  ideas  of  some  on 
this  subject  to  the  case  of  "  a  humorsome  company, 
who  should  distinguish  themselves  by  wearing  a 
blue  or  yellow  girdle,  and  call  themselves  mankind." 
So  he  thinks  of  those  who  style  themselves  ''•The 
church,^^  and  the  rest  "  Separatists." 

'  In  Han.  iii.  49.     *  Letter  concerning  Stillingfleet's  Sermon, 
Works,  179. 

SEPARATION  may  not  be  schism.  —  Barrowe 
and  Greenwood,  in  their  Answer  to  Giffard,^  retort, 
that  what  would  affix  the  blot  of  schism  on  them 


SEPARATION.  337 

for  separating  from  the  church  of  England,  would 
affix  the  same  on  the  church  of  England  for  sepa- 
rating from  the  church  of  Rome.  Johnson  uses  the 
same  argument  in  his  Treatise  of  Some  Things 
which  concern  the  Reformed  Churches.^  The 
Saints'  Apology  ^  says :  "  Luther  made  a  separation 
from  the  external  communion  of  all  the  churches  in 
the  world ;  .  .  .  yet  none  but  Papists,  or  such  as  long 
for  a  captain  to  lead  them  back  again  into  Egypt, 
will  accuse  him  of  having  made  a  schism ;  ...  for 
he  separated,  not  from  believers,  but  from  unbe- 
lievers." Burton  tells  Prynne,^  that  John  the 
Baptist  (?),  and  even  Christ  himself,  gathered 
churches  out  of  the  Jewish  church.  Owen,  in  his 
Nature  of  Schism,*  says :  "  When  a  man's  leaving 
the  ordinary  communion  of  any  particular  church 
for  his  own  edification  to  join  with  another  .  .  . 
is  proved  to  be  schism,  I  shall  acknowledge  it." 
Neal,  in  his  History  of  the  Puritans,^  says :  "  There 
may  be  separation  from  a  true  church  without 
schism,  and  schism  within  a  church  without  separa- 
tion." Cambridge  Platform  ^  quotes  Dr.  Ames's 
judgment,  and  says  :  "  In  this  case,  for  aught  we 
know,  it  passeth  without  exception.  ...  If  any, 
wronged  with  unjust  vexation,  or  providing  for  his 
own  edification,  or  in  testimony  against  sin,  depart 
from  a  church  where  some  evils  are  tolerated,  and 
join  himself  to  another  more  pure,  yet,  without 
condemning  of  the  church  he  leaveth,  he  is  not 
therefore  to  be  held  as  a  schismatic,  or  as  guilty  of 
any  other  sin."  —  See  Affinity  ;  Members  ;  Schism. 

29 


338  SEPARATION. 

» In  Han.  i.  53.    «  ib.  312.     ^  ib.  ii.  232,  233.     ■*  lb.  398.    »  lb. 
iii.  444.     ^1  Preface,  xi.     '  Preface,  xi. 


SEPARATION,  reasons  of.— The  Low  Country 
Exiles  ^  make  the  following  objections  to  the  church 
of  England  :  "  The  whole  land  being  received  into 
the  church ;  retaining  the  Popish  clergy  and  prelacy, 
and  the  rest  of  the  rabble,  which  they  received  from 
the  Romish  apostacy,  about  forty  Popish  offices 
being,  at  this  day,  in  the  church  of  England,  not 
appointed  by  Christ  in  his  Testament ;  the  inferior 
clergy  being  unlearned,  and  cannot  preach  at  all,  and 
live  in  servitude  of  the  bishops ;  the  administration 
which  is  imposed  on  all;  .  .  .  they  have  gathered 
their  service-book  verbatim  out  of  the  mass-book." 
Robinson,  in  his  Answer  to  Hall,~  shows  that  the 
church  are  required  to  be  separate  from  the  world, 
and  the  English  church  have  not  made  such  a  sepa- 
ration :  "  We  have  chosen,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
rather  to  separate  ourselves  to  the  Lord  from  it,  than 
wiih  it  from  him."  He  enumerates  ^  the  Romish 
practices  in  the  English  church,  and  *  says :  "  Where 
truth  is  a  gainer,  God,  who  is  truth,  cannot  be  a 
loser."  So  he  quails  not  before  the  assertion  of  his 
opponent,  that  "whoremongers  and  murderers  shall 
abide  an  easier  answer  than  separation."  *  In  his 
Apology^  he  represents  the  hierarchal  government 
as  overtopping  by  head  and  shoulders  the  Pope,  the 
head  only  being  cut  off,  upon  whose  shoulders  some 
would  place  the  civil  magistrate  ;  and  that  the  field 
was,  under  the  most  severe  penalties,  purposely  sown 
with  tares. 


SEPARATION.  339 

» In  Han.  i.  93.  '  ib.  i87,  188  ;  and  Works,  iii.  406.  ^  In  Han. 
i.  191—199;  and  Works,  iii.  409—418.  ■*  In  Han.  i.  202;  and 
Works,  iii.  419.  *  Asserted  in  Han.  i.  186  ;  and  Works,  iii.  404. 
« In  Han.  i.  385. 

SEPARATION,  cause  of^  in  persecution  to  enforce 
conformity.  —  The  seeming  little  importance  of  the 
ceremonies  has  often  induced  the  plea,  that  the 
Separatists  ought  to  have  conformed,  and  saved 
themselves  from  so  much  trouble,  and  the  church 
ofEngland  from  division.  This  they  would  have 
gladly  done,  had  their  consciences  allowed,  and  had 
they  not  been  required  to  swear  belief  in  what  they 
firmly  disbelieved.  Hooper  objected  to  being  made 
a  bishop  in  the  usual  habiliments,  because  the  com- 
mon people  would  worship  the  garments,  as  they 
had  been  taught  to  do  by  the  Papal  priesthood. 
For  this  he  was  sent  a  prisoner  to  the  Fleet.^  The 
persecutions  of  Elizabeth  threw  those  of  Mary  into 
the  shade.  They  commenced  with  enforcing  the 
acts  of  the  queen's  supremacy,  of  uniformity  in 
common  prayer,  and  the  establishment  of  the  Court 
of  High  Commission.^  Then^  we  may  see  the 
successive  steps  of  her  demands,  part  of  which 
were,  the  sacrament  to  be  received  kneeling;  un- 
leavened bread  alone  allowed ;  the  wearing  of  copes, 
surplices,  and  square  caps,  by  the  ministers,  which 
were  all  considered  by  the  reformers  as  tending  to 
idolatry,  because  the  people  had  been  required  to 
adore  them,  and  the  posture  of  kneeling  at  the 
sacrament  had  been  enforced  as  an  act  of  adoration 
to  the  "  breaden  God."  Elizabeth  declared  that  she 
cared  not  for  their  consciences ;  but  outward  con- 


340  SEPARATION. 

formity  she  would  have,  or  she  world  "  hew  them 
into  shape."  Passing  over  the  many  thrilling  scenes 
that  intervened,  there  passed,  in  1592-3,  the  act 
which  required  every  person  above  the  age  of  six- 
teen to  go  frequently  to  the  Episcopal  Church,  or 
abjure  the  realm  ;  and  if  he  returned,  to  suffer  death 
without  benefit  of  clergy.  At  this  time,  the  prisons 
were  full  of  persons  confined  and  dying  there  for 
nonconformity.  But,  on  the  passing  of  this  act,  the 
doors  were  thrown  open,  and  those  who  had  chosen 
rather  to  die  in  prison  than  do  violence  to  their 
consciences  were  permitted  to  go  into  banishment. 
Here  was  the  origin  of  the  Lov/  Country  Exiles, 
many  of  whom  eventually  became  the  planters  of 
America,  —  an  origin  which  promised  something, 
and  under  God  has  accomplished  wonders.*  In 
1604  the  royal  proclamation  of  King  James  I. 
declared  all  to  be  excommunicated,  ipso  facto^  who 
should  affirm  that  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
contained  any  thing  repugnant  to  the  Scriptures ; 
that  any  part  of  the  thirty-nine  articles  were  super- 
stitious or  erroneous,  or  such  as  he  might  not  "  with 
a  good  conscience  subscribe  unto,"  with  divers  other 
points,  equally  and  vitally  important,  and  closing 
with,  "  or  shall  affirm  that  there  are,  within  this 
realm,  other  meetings  ...  of  the  king's  born  sub- 
jects than  such  as  are  established  by  law,  that  may 
rightly  challenge  to  themselves  the  name  of  true 
and  lawful  churches."  *  In  such  circumstances, 
what  could  conscientious  dissenters  do  ?  Ministers 
were  required  to  swear  to  the  royal  supremacy  over 
all  matters  civil  and  ecclesiastical ;  and  there  was 


SEPARATION.  341 

no  other  alternative  for  them  than  perjury  on  the 
one  hand,  and  separation,  with  imprisonment,  exile, 
or  death,  on  the  other.  It  was  under  these  circum- 
stances that  the  Robinson  Church  went  to  Holland, 
amid  every  legal  and  illegal  persecution,  even  pa- 
rents and  young  children  being  separated  by  an 
armed  band ;  and  thus,  through  much  tribulation, 
entered  the  kingdom  of  heaven.®  Neal,  in  his  Puri- 
tans,^ informs  us,  that,  in  the  early  part  of  Elizabeth's 
reign,  the  rubric  which  declared  that,  in  kneeling, 
no  adoration  was  intended  to  any  corporal  presence 
of  Christ  in  the  bread,  was  expunged.  Mr.  Choules 
tells  us,  on  the  authority  of  Dr.  Price,^  that  it  was 
easy  to  tell  the  number  of  martyrs  that  Popery  led 
to  the  stake,  but  no  other  than  the  Omniscient  Being 
is  competent  to  reveal  the  secrets  of  Whitgift's  dark 
and  loathsome  prison-house  ;  and  the  martyrdom  of 
these  prisoners  was  not  one  jot  less  wicked  or  cruel 
than  that  which  Gardiner  and  Bonner  pra(^tised. 
See  a  description  of  some  of  their  sufferings  in  ib. 
235 — 243.  —  See  Kneeling;  Habits;  Ceremonies; 
Persecutions  for  Congregationalism. 

Punchard's  Hist.  207 ;  and  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  52—58.  "^  Pun- 
chard's  Hist.  228.  =*Ib.  229— 243.  ^ib.  293— 295.  *Ib.  310— 312. 
« Ib.  314—322.    '  Vol.  i.  76.     »  Note  to  ib.  236. 

SEPARATION,  luhen  required;  how  long  to  be 
forborne.  —  Welde,  in  his  Keply  to  Rathband,^ 
quotes  the  Answer  to  the  Thirty-two  Questions : 
"  When  a  man  must  himself  conform  to  corruptions, 
then  his  standing  is  unlawful."  Ainsworth,  in  his 
Communion  of  Saints,^  says  :  "  The  saints  should 

29* 


842  SEPARATION. 

bear  one  another's  infirmities  and  diversity  of  judg- 
ment, especially  for  the  present,  till  the  truth  can  be 
tried  out  either  among  themselves,  or  by  the  help 
of  other  churches,  which  was  the  practice  in  the 
apostles'  days."  Jacob's  Church  Confession,  art. 
xv.,^  says  :  "  We  believe,  concerning  mixtures  of  the 
open  profane  with  some  manifest  godly  Christians 
in  a  visible  church,  that  what  soul  soever,  in  such  a 
state,  desireth  to  be  in  safety,  ought,  with  all  dili- 
gence, to  leave  that  spiritual  society."  Owen,  in  his 
Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  chap,  i.,*  argues  that 
we  should  withdraw  from  a  church  where  there  is 
that  which  endangers  the  edification  or  salvation 
of  the  soul.  Punchard,  in  his  History,*  shows  from 
Robinson's  Researches,  that  Tertullian  and  Privatus 
separated  from  the  churches  with  which  they  were 
once  connected,  on  account  of  the  innovations  in 
them.  Watts,  in  his  Foundation  of  a  Christian 
Church,^  shows  the  right  to  separate  from  even  true 
churches.  He  says :  "  The  churches  must  not  be 
turned  into  prisons."  Cambridge  Platform  ^  makes 
the  just  occasions  for  removal  from  churches  to 
be,  —  if  a  man  cannot  remain  without  sin  ;  per- 
sonal or  general  persecution ;  or  want  of  subsistence. 
Robert  Hall,  in  his  Terms  of  Communion,^  says  if 
communion  with  a  Christian  society  cannot  be  had 
without  compliance  with  rights  and  usages  which 
we  deem  idolatrous  and  superstitious,  or  without  a 
surrender  of  thit  liberty  in  which  we  are  com- 
manded to  stand  fast,  we  must,  as  we  value  our 
allegiance,  forego,  however  reluctantly,  the  advan- 
tages of  such  a  union.    Lobb,  in  his  True  Dissenter,' 


SEPARATION.  343 

says  :  "  Those  that  are  persuaded  of  the  sinfulness 
of  the  terms  ought  not  to  communicate  with  the 
imposing  church."  —  See  next  article. 

>  In  Han.  ii.  326,  327.  *  lb.  i.  284.  ^  lb.  298.  -»  Works,  xx. 
366.  =  Page  48.  «  Works,  iii.  227.  '  Chap.  xiii.  sect.  4.  «  Works, 
i.  290.     9  Page  130. 

SEPARATION,  when  condemned.  —  The  Saints' 
Apology  ^  condemns  all  separation  from  the  invisible 
church,  "which  cannot  be  done  but  by  denying  the 
faith,"  but  commends  separating  from  corruptions. 
Cambridge  Platform  ^  says :  "  To  separate  out  of 
contempt  of  holy  fellowship,  for  covetousness,  or 
want  of  love,  ...  or  what  .  .  .  should  be  tolerated, 
...  is  unlawful  and  sinful."  Burton,  in  his  Rejoin- 
der to  Prynne's  Reply,'  says :  "  We  separate  from 
none  we  know  to  be  true  churches.  If  they  would 
give  us  leave,  in  their  communion,  to  protest  against 
those  corruptions  which  we  think  defile  them,  we 
should  not  scruple."  Hall,  in  his  Puritans  and  their 
Principles,*  shows  that  Robinson  was  against  sepa- 
rating from  any  churches  of  Christ,  only  from  the 
national  constitution  and  government  of  the  English 
church.  Robinson  also  maintained  this  in  his 
Answer  to  Helwisse.*  Robert  Hall,  in  his  Terms  of 
Communion,^  says  :  Divisions  among  Christians, 
especially  when  it  proceeds  to  a  breach  of  Christian 
union,  is  so  fraught  with  scandal,  and  is  so  utterly 
repugnant  to  the  genius  of  the  gospel,  that  the  whole 
Christian  world  have  agreed  in  regarding  it  as  an 
evil,  on  no  occasion  to  be  incurred  but  for  the  avoid- 
ance of   a  greater,  —  the  violation  of  conscience. 


344  SEPARATION. 

Whenever  by  receiving  we  must  sanction  what  the 
word  of  God  condemns,  we  must  come  out.  This 
justifies  the  separation  from  Rome,  and  from  the 
church  of  England.  The  Low  Country  Exiles,  in 
their  Letter  to  Junius,^  say :  "  We  are  persuaded 
that  separation  should  not  be  made  from  any  church, 
either  rashly  or  at  all,  so  long  as  we  may  remain 
with  sound  faith  and  consciences."  In  the  Answer 
of  the  New  England  Elders  to  the  Nine  Positions,^  it 
is  said  of  those  "  who  withdraw  themselves  from  an 
able  and  faithful  ministry  as  no  ministry  of  Christ, 
and  from  godly  congregations  as  no  churches  of 
Christ,  because  of.  some  corruptions,  from  which, 
through  want  of  light,  not  love  of  truth,  they  are 
not  thoroughly  cleansed,  —  against  such  we  have 
ever  luitnessedP 

'  In  Han.  ii.  232.  ^  Chap.  xiii.  sect.  o.  =*  Page  47.  *  Page  221. 
*  In  Punchard's  Hist.  335  ;  and  Works,  iii.  105.  ^  Works,  i.  334. 
'  In  Han.  i.  139.     «  lb.  ii.  26. 

SEPARATION  not  made  hy  Congregationalisfs. 
Congregationalism,  as  Contained  in  the  Scriptures 
and  Explained  by  the  Platform,^  shows  that  "  the 
churches  of  New  England  did  not  separate  from 
the  church  of  England,  but  were  driven  out  by  per- 
secution." Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  Schism,^  says : 
"  Unless  a  unity  can  be  fixed,  our  departure  cannot 
be  proved."  He  maintained  that  he  did  not  belong 
to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  because  he  had  never  con- 
sented to,  and  so  he  did  not  separate  from  him ; 
that  if  the  bishop  had  a  flock  there,  which  he  would 
attend,  he  should  be  glad  of  his  neighborhood.     He 


SEPARATION.  845 

denies  the  charge  ^  that  he  "  unministers  their  mini- 
sters, and  unchurches  their  churches,"  but  does  not 
thence  justify  and  own  their  way,  wherein  they  dif- 
fer from  the  Congregational  ministers  of  England. 
He  disclaims  the  advocacy  of  any  Independentism 
thus  unchurching  any  true  churches,  while  he  advo- 
cates the  peaceable  proceeding  of  any  people  of 
God  to  join  in  the  ordinances  of  Jesus  Christ,  re- 
forming abuses,  &c.  Prince,  in  his  Chronology,^ 
quotes  from  Baillie,  showing  that  Robinson  was  at 
first  a  separatist,  but  was  brought  to  greater  mode- 
ration by  Dr.  Ames  and  Mr.  Parker,  and  became  a 
principal  overthrower  of  the  Brownists  and  the  au- 
thor of  Independency.  (See  Brownists  ;  Indepen- 
dents.) The  Brownists  in  Leyden  would  hardly 
hold  communion  with  Robinson ;  but  Robinson 
held  occasional  communion  with  the  Reformed 
churches.*  Elder  Brewster  required  no  declaration 
of  separation  from  the  church  of  England.^  Young 
in  his  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,^  says :  "  Robin- 
son was  always  against  separation  from  any  of  the 
churches  of  Christ."  Gov.  Bradford,  in  his  Answer 
to  L^ ford's  Charge,  denied  that  they  were  Brown- 
ists, or,  like  those  sectarians,  renounced  the  church 
of  England.^  Joshua  Scottow,  in  his  Narrative  of 
the  Planting  and  Training  of  the  Massachusetts 
Colony,  says :  ^  They  did  not  close  with  the  hierar- 
chy, .  .  .  and  were  not  with  the  rigid  separation. 
See  quotation  from  Neal's  History  of  New  England, 
in  article  Congregationalism,  ivhat. 

»  Page  8.     2  In  Han.  iii.  442,  443.     ^  ib.  464.    ^  Page  87.    *  lb. 
87.     «  lb.  89.     7  Page  388.    »  Eliot  Biog.  Diet.  81.    »  Page  19. 


846  SEPARATISTS. 

SEPARATISTS.  — It  will  be  perceived  by  perus- 
ing a  few  of  the  preceding  and  the  next  succeeding 
articles,  that  this  word  was  used  in  different  senses, 
and  is  a  somewhat  comparative  term.  The  Epis- 
copalians usually  called  all  the  dissenters  Separa- 
tists ;  whereas  our  fathers  usually  applied  the  term 
to  those  who  denounced  the  English  Episcopal 
congregations  as  no  churches,  and  refused  all  spiri- 
tual communion  with  them.  Francis  Johnson,  one 
of  the  most  rigid  Separatists,  published,  in  1608, 
Certain  Reasons  and  Arguments,  "  proving  that  it 
is  not  lawful  to  hear  or  have  any  spiritual  commu- 
nion with  the  present  ministry  of  the  church  of 
England."  *  The  Letter  accompanying  the  Answer 
to  the  Nine  Positions  shows  that  the  New  England 
churches  were  not  rigid  Separatists.  They  sepa- 
rated not  from  the  churches  of  England  as  such, 
but  from  the  corruptions  which  they  conceived  to 
be  left  in  these  churches ;  yet  they  left  the  few  rigid 
ones  among  them  "  to  the  liberty  of  their  own  judg- 
ments without  molestation." 

*  Han.  i.  167.  In  a  note  may  be  seen  how  he  was  opposed  by 
William  Bradshaw. 

SEPARATISTS,  semi.  —  This  was  the  title  which 
our  Congregational  fathers  at  length  received,  when 
the  distinction  between  them  and  the  Brownists 
came  to  be  better  understood.  H.  Jacob,  in  his 
Plainer  Opening  of  a  Divine  Beginning,  &c.,^  says; 
"  I  acknowledge  that  in  England  are  true  visible 
churches,  .  .  .  such  as  I  refuse  not  to  communicate 
with."     Robinson,  in  his  Treatise  on  Communion, 


SERMONS.  34T 

maintains  that  we  must  separate  from  the  wrong 
things  connected  with  the  hierarchy,  but  not  from 
the  private  communion  with  Christians  in  the 
church  of  England  ;  and,**  as  Hanbury  asserts, 
"  goes  on  to  show  that  the  Lord's  peopla  may  not 
communicate  with  them,  in  regard  to  government 
ecclesiastical,  and  the  ministry  thence  derived." 
He  asserts  substantially  the  same  things  in  his 
Posthumous  Treatise,*  showing  that  he  cannot, 
however,  communicate  with  their  church  order  and 
ordinances,  without  being  condemned  of  his  own 
heart. —  See  Separation;  Catholicism;  Commu- 
nion. 

» In  Han.  i.  230.  '  lb.  259  ;  and  Works,  iii.  105.  ^  lb.  264. 
*  lb.  451,  458  ;  and  Works,  iii.  353—378. 

SERMONS,  length  of;  studied;  written.  —  Cot- 
ton Mather^  shows  that  the  primitive  preachers 
usually  confined  themselves  to  about  an  hour.  He, 
moreover,  says :  "  If  they  hear  preachers  boasting 
that  they  have  been  in  their  studies  but  a  few  hours, 
on  a  Saturday  or  so,  they  reckon  that  such  persons 
rather  glory  in  their  shame.  Sudden  sermons  they 
may  sometimes  admire  from  their  accomplished 
ministers,  when  the  suddenness  has  not  been  a 
chosen  circumstance. . . .  The  best  ministers  in  New 
England  ordinarily  would  blush  to  address  their 
flocks  without  preparation."  (See  Ministers  should 
give  themselves  ivholly  to  their  ivork.)  Speaking  of 
preaching  with  notes,  he  says :  "  No  doubt,  some 
sermons  are  the  better  composed  for  it ;  but  it  will 
require  good  management  if  they  be  not  the  less 


348  SINaiNG. 

affecting. ...  It  was  very  little  practised  or  approved 
of  in  this  country  till  of  latter  years." 

'  Rat.  Dis.  57—61. 

SIGN  OF  THE  CROSS.— R.  Parker,  in  his  Trea- 
tise  against  Symbolizing  with  Antichrist,  especially 
in  the  Sign  of  the  Cross,  says  ^  the  cross,  surplice, 
&c.,  they  say,  "  being  consecrate  to  his  service,  they 
become  things  of  God,  yea,  parts  of  God,  whose 
worship  is  the  worship  of  God."  He  answers  the 
Episcopal  argument,  that  they  had  changed  the 
sign  of  the  cross,  saying :  ^  "Of  the  things  that  may 
be  changed  from  their  abuse,  the  sign  of  the  cross 
is  none."  —  See  Ceremonies  ;  Habits. 

»  Page  8.    *  lb.  25. 

SINGING.  —  Cotton  tells  BalP  that  the  Psalms 
cannot  be  sung  without  the  help  of  music,  natural 
music  at  least ;  and  so  this  is  ordained  of  God,  ac- 
cording to  the  light  of  nature,  and  does  not  fall 
under  the  general  negative  precept  of  forbidding 
human  inventions  in  the  worship  of  God ;  but  thai 
this  does  not  apply  to  a  devised  form  of  prayer. 
I.  Chauncy  ^  says :  "  Some  do  scruple  singing  in  a 
mixed  congregation ;  but  it  ought  not  to  be  scru- 
pled, any  more  than  the  church's  prayers,  .  .  .  and 
they  that  ought  not  to  be  excluded  from  hearing 
the  word,  ought  not  to  be  excluded  from  praising 
God  for  the  word  of  his  grace."  In  a  Brief  Dis- 
course concerning  Regular  Singing,  published  in 
Boston  in  1725,  it  is  argued  forcibly  that  there  is 
a  necessity  of  skill  in  vocal  music.     There  was  a 


SUBSCRIPTION.  349 

great  contention  between  minister  and  people  on 
the  subject  of  singing,  in  the  church  in  Bradford,  in 

*  In  Han.  ii.  161.  =  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  87.  ^  Eliot. 
Biog.  Diet.  449,  450.  V 

STANDING  COMMITTEES.— Mitchell'  notes 
the  fact  that  many  of  our  churches  have  standing 
committees,  and  cautions  that  they  be  not  invested 
with  presbyterial  powers,  saying  that  he  knows  of 
instances  where  they  are  invested  with  such  powers. 
"  To  co«nmit  the  watch  and  discipline  of  the  church 
to  a  permanent  committee,  ...  is  not  Congrega- 
tional." —  See  Scriptures  a  sufficient  guide  to  or* 
der ;  Officers,  God^s  gift,  and  not  to  be  multiplied, 

»  Guide,  142,  143. 

SUBSCRIPTION  was  first  enjoined  in  1571,  and 
universally  enforced  in  three  articles  fn  1584.  The 
articles  were  —  the  queen's  sovereign  authority ; 
that  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  ordination 
of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  contains  nothing  in 
it  contrary  to  the  word  of  God ;  and  the  articles  of 
religion,  agreed  upon  by  the  bishops  and  archbishops 
in  1562,  are  all  agreeable  to  God.'  The  Offer  of  a 
Conference  by  the  Deprived  Ministers  in  the  reign 
of  James  P  states,  that,  in  about  one  year,  three 
hundred  ministers  have  been  turned  out  of  Christ's 
service,  only  for  refusing  such  ceremonies  as  have 
their  life,  breath,  and  being  from  Popery  ;  and  such 
a  subscription  as  the  like  hath  never  been  urged 
under  a  Christian  magistrate.     The  Canons  of  Con- 

30 


350  SUCCESSION. 

vocation '  denounced  excommunication,  ipso  facto^ 
upon  all  who  refuse  to  subscribe,  that  the  church  of 
England  is  a  true,  apostolical  church  ;  that  the  Com- 
mon Prayer  contains  nothing  contrary  to  the  word 
^f  God;  that  none  of  the  thirty-nine  articles  are 
superstitious  ;  or  that  there  are  other  churches  than 
the  Episcopal,  and  the  like. 

»  Nichols's  Plea,  in  Han.  i.  3,  4.     ""  lb.  126.     '^  lb.  121,  122. 

SUCCESSION  in  churches.  —  This  is  shown  by 
Mather  and  Tompson,  in  their  Answer  to  Herle,^  to 
be  essential^  that  is,  confined  to  the  questioruof  obey- 
ing God  ;  not  ministerial^  i.  e.  by  direct  line  from  the 
apostles.  "  Such  a  principle  would  unchurch  all 
Christian  communities." 

1  In  Han.  ii.  170. 

SUCCESSION,  ministerial^  interrupted  or  uninter- 
rupted ?  —  Barrowe,  in  his  Refutation  of  Giffard,^ 
shows  in  substance,  that  if  those  who  hold  it  unin- 
terrupted hold  the  church  of  Rome  a  true  church, 
then  are  they,  on  their  own  principles,  schismatics  ; 
if  otherwise,  then  their  ordination  is  through  a  false 
church.  Neal  ^  shows  that  the  bishops  in  the  English 
church,  all  save  one,  declined,  when  the  act  of  uni- 
formity was  passed,  and  were  deprived  ;  and 
Archbishop  Parker  was  consecrated  by  some  who 
had  been  deprived  in  the  late  reign ;  so  that  the 
Papists  made  him  and  his  coadjutors  doubt  the 
validity  of  their  own  ordination,  till  Parliament 
confirmed  it  about  seven  years  after.  English  bish- 
ops, therefore,  have  their  succession  through  deposed 


SUSPENSION.  351 

bishops,  and  ex  post  facto  Parliament  laws  ;  and  not 
in  an  unbroken  chain  from  Peter,  with  authority  to 
bind  and  loose.  All  this,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
question,  through  which  of  the  contemporaneous 
rival  Popes  they  received  the  transmission  of  apos- 
tolical succession.  —  See  Bishops  ;  Ordination  by 
ministers ;  by  direct  succession, 

*  In  Han.  i.  58.     "^  Hist.  Puritans,  i.  78. 

SUSPENSION,  pastoral  condemned.  —  Barrowe, 
in  his  Description  of  a  False  Church,^  says  :  "  They 
add  new  devices  of  their  own,  as  pastoral  suspension 
from  the  sacraments."  Baillie^  says:  "The  Inde- 
pendents denied  the  lawfulness  of  all  such  censures." 

J  In  Han.  i.  46.     '  lb.  ii.  256. 

SUSPENSION,  church ;  is  it  lawful  ?  —  Mitchell » 
thinks  that  it  is,  though  he  says  that  some  doubt  it. 
The  compiler  is  of  that  »umber.  Johnson,  who 
was  presbyterially  inclined,  is  the  only  writer  among 
the  early  Congregationalists,  who,  to  my  knowledge, 
advocated  it.  (See  his  views  in  Hanbury,  i.  318.) 
The  authors  of  the  Congregational  Manual^  make 
it  a  kind  of  probation,  and  what  the  church  may  do 
pending  the  trial  of  one  accused.  Isaac  Chauncy  ^ 
says  :  "  Suspension  is  unwarranted  by  Christ,  and 
the  member  has  a  right  to  church  privileges,  till  fully 
convict  before  the  church.  Hence,  brethren  sin 
greatly  in  withdrawing  from  communion  on  account 
of  the  supposed  sin  of  a  member."  —  See  Letch- 
ford,  Punchard,  and  Upham,  in  article  Admonition. 

»  Guide,  104.     ^  Page  36.     ^  Diy.  inst.  Cong.  Churches,  129. 


352  SYNODS. 

SUSPICION  not  a  ground  for  discipline.  —  Brad- 
shaw,  in  his  English  Puritanism,^  says  :  "  By  virtue 
of  these  keys,  they  are  not  to  examine  and  make 
inquisition  into  the  hearts  of  men,  nor  to  molest 
them  upon  uncertain  fame,  but  to  proceed  only  upon 
open  and  notorious  crimes."  —  See  Accusation  ; 
Discipline. 

» In  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  249. 

SYNODS  not  juridical.  —  Goodwin  has  the 
fourth,  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  chapters  of  his  fifth 
book  on  Church  Government  against  the  subordi- 
nation of  synods  to  exercise  jurisdiction.  He  argues 
against  it,  "  because  there  is  no  warrant  for  it  in  the 
Scriptures.  ...  It  would  introduce  a  foreign  ecclesi- 
astical power  in  every  state  and  kingdom.  .  .  .  There 
is  no  standing  rule  by  which  it  should  be  managed. 
...  It  requires  representations  arising  from  represen- 
tations, for  which  there  is  no  Scripture  warrant.  .  .  . 
And  Acts  XV.  and  the  analogy  of  Matt,  xviii.  do  not 
prove  such  a  subordination  and  juridical  power." 
The  Savoy  Confession  ^  disallows  the  power  of  all 
stated  synods,  presbyteries,  &c.,  over  particular 
churches,  but  admits  that  such  assemblies  may  meet 
to  give  advice,  without  exercising  any  jurisdiction. 
Jacob's  Church,  in  their  Confession,  art.  v.^  say : 
"  On  occasion  there  ought  to  be  a  consociation  .  .  . 
of  churches,  but  not  a  subordination,  or  surely  not 
a  subjection, . . .  under  any  higher  spiritual  authority, 
only  Christ  and  the  Holy  Scriptures."  Paget  ^ 
complains  of  Davenport,  saying:  "  This  is  no  more 
than  Mr.  Jacob  did  give  to  classes  and  synods  for 


SYNODS.  853 

counsel  and  advice."  Davenport,  in  his  Power  of 
Congregational  Churches,  says  :  *  "  God  hath  en- 
joined entireness  of  jurisdiction  ...  to  a  particular 
church.  Who,  then,  shall  sunder  it  from  such  a 
church,  and  place  it  in  classes  and  supreme  judica- 
tories where  God  never  put  it  ?  "  Richard  Mather, 
in  his  Answer  to  Rutherford,*  shows  that  the  parallel 
does  not  hold,  so  that  classes  have  jurisdiction  over 
churches,  as  the  Jewish  Sanhedrim  had  over  the 
synagogues.  And  ^  he  shows  that  other  churches 
may  not  take  power  even  from  an  erring  church  ; 
for  who  gave  them  this  authority?  Welde,  in  his 
Answer  to  Rathband,^  shows  that  delegating  repre- 
sentatives to  do  church  work  does  not  imply  a 
jurisdiction  in  them  over  the  churches.  The 
Desires  of  the  Independents^  craves  "that  congre- 
gations may  not  be  brought  under  the  government 
of  classical,  provincial,  or  national  assemblies,  in 
respect  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction."  Bartlett's 
Model  ^  inquires,  "  Where  do  these  men  read,  in  all 
the  New  Testament,  of  these  greater  assemblies, 
with  authoritative  power?  "  Secretary  Cook,  in  his 
What  the  Independents  Would  Have,  says :  ^°  "I 
shall  tell  you  in  one  word  what  will  content  every 
Independent  in  England,  viz.  —  an  entire  exemption 
from  the  jurisdiction  of  prelates  and  ecclesiastical 
officers  other  than  themselves  shall  choose."  Milton, 
in  his  Answer  to  Salmasius,^^  says  :  "  They  which 
we  call  Independents  are  only  such  as  hold  that  no 
classes  or  synods  have  a  superiority  over  any  parti- 
cular church."  Cotton,  in  his  Keys,'"  shows  that,  if 
it  be  granted  that  a  synod  may  better  understand 
so* 


854  SYNODS.  I 

the  rule  of  proceeding,  they  are  further  removed 
from  the  knowledge  of  the  facts  and  of  the  spirit  of 
the  offender  than  a  particular  church  ;  and  ^^  that 
the  church  is  not  now  to  be  under  tutors  and 
governors,  as  in  her  Jewish  nonage.  Cambridge 
Platform  ^*  says :  "  It  belongs  to  synods  and  councils 
to  determine  controversies  of  faith  and  cases  of 
conscience  ;  to  clear  from  the  word  holy  directions, 
for  the  worship  of  God  and  good  government  of 
the  church  ;  to  bear  witness  against  maladministra- 
tion in  any  particular  church,  and  to  give  directions 
for  the  reformation  thereof;  not  to  exercise  church 
censures^  in  way  of  discipline^  nor  any  act  of  church 
authority  and  jurisdiction^  which  that  {the  Antioch  and 
Jerusalem)  presidential  synod  did  forhearT  In  the 
Appendix  to  Hooker's  Survey,^*  those  who  sent  the 
book  to  be  printed  after  his  death  say :  "  This  is 
known  to  be  the  author's  mind,  which  the  whole 
discourse  doth  manifest,  that  he  denies  a  synod  hath 
juridical  power,  .  .  .  and  grants  a  synod  that  hath 
power  of  counsel."  Samuel  Mather,  in  his  Apology,^® 
urges  to  find  where  Christ  placed  the  final  termina- 
tion of  causes,  and  rest  the  case  there.  He  says : 
"  It  is  to  be  hoped  the  brethren  in  these  churches  .  .  . 
will  never  think  of  placing  juridical  power  in  coun- 
cils and  synods."  He  shows  ^^  that  a  synod  or 
consociation  is  not  a  "  church  of  churches,  as  Mr. 
Cotton  once  spoke,  though  he  afterward  spoke  and 
thought  otherwise.''^  Increase  Mather,  in  his  Disqui- 
sition on  Ecclesiastical  Councils,^"  shows  that  a 
New  England  Platform  synod  cannot  exercise  any. 
authority ;  that  the  nature  and  power  of  synods  is 


^  SYNODS.  355 

only  decisive,  not  authoritative,  i.e.  judicial.  He 
cites  Norton's  Catechism :  "  Ques.  What  is  the 
power  of  a  council  ?  Ans.  To  declare  truth,  not 
to  exercise  authority."  Davenport,  in  his  Apologet- 
ical  Reply,*^  states  the  power  of  a  classis  to  be,  not 
juridical,  but  ministerial,  stewardly,  like  that  of 
ambassadors.  Cotton  Mather,  in  his  Ratio  Disci- 
plinae,'^"  says  :  "  The  synods  of  New  England  pretend 
to  no  juridical  power,  nor  any  supremacy,  but  what 
is  merely  instructive  and  suasory.  .  .  .  When  they 
have  done,  all  the  churches  are  at  liberty  to  judge 
how  far  their  doctrine  is  to  be  followed."  This  from 
one  of  the  most  stringent  men  of  his  day,  and  one 
who  in  early  life  had  strongly  advocated  the  "  Pro- 
posals" for  a  standing  juridical  council.  (See 
Wise's  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Espoused,  p.  79.) 
Hubbard,  in  his  History  of  Massachusetts,^^  though 
he  complains  of  both  the  church- and  civil  govern- 
ment as  too  popular,  still  asserts  it  as  a  principle 
of  the  New  England  Churches,  that  "  there  is  no 
jurisdiction  to  which  particular  churches  ought  to  be 
subject."  The  Synod  of  1637  refused  to  name  the 
persons  who  held  the  doctrines  they  condemned, 
because  that  assembly  (not  owning  themselves  to 
have  any  judicial  power)  had  not  to  do  with  per- 
sons, but  doctrines  only.^^  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his 
•Divine  Institution  of  Congregational  Churches,^^ 
affirms  that  synods  and  councils  are  not  juridical. — 
See  Appeals  ;  Councils. 

*  In  Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  179.  ^  In  Han.  i.  295.  'lb.  542, 
4  lb.  ii.  64.  '  lb.  180.  «  lb.  184.  ^  lb.  300.  »  lb.  iii.  44.  ^  lb. 
240.      "lb.   251.      "lb.  372.      "Page   17.      >=»  lb.   106,  107. 


856  SYNODS. 

w  Chap.  xvi.  sect.  4.  "  Part  iv.  43.  »'  Page  128.  "  Pages  19— 
24.  "  Pages  29,  30.  *»  Page  229.  ^o  Pages  172,  173.  ^i  Page 
184.    ^2  Winthrop's  Journal,  i.  238.     '-^'-^  Page  136. 


SYNODS,  of  whom  conslUuted.  —  Cambridge 
Platform  ^  says :  "  Synods  are  to  consist  both  of 
elders  and  other  church  members,  endued  with  gifts 
and  sent  by  the  churches,  not  excluding  the  presence 
of  any  brethren  in  the  churches."  Increase  Mather^ 
maintains  the  right  of  private  members  to  sit  in 
councils  and  synods,  because  all  agree  that  they  sit 
not  by  virtue  of  their  office,  but  their  delegation, 
and  have  no  rule  of  jurisdiction.  —  See  Councils, 
of  whom  composed. 

^  Chap.  xvi.  sect.  6.      ^  Disq.  Ecc.  Councils,  25—28 

SYNODS  fiot  legislative.  —  Watts,  in  his  Founda- 
tion of  a  Christian  Church,^  shows  that  a  synod  has 
no  power  to  make  laws  ;  if  it  had,  then  others  might 
be  deputed  to  act  in  larger  synods,  and  they  may 
depute  all  to  the  Pope,  "  so  we  are  at  Rome  ere  we 
are  aware."  Punchard,  in  his  History,^  shows  that 
general  synods,  with  legislative  power,  were  actually 
one  great  source  of  corruption  to  the  primitive 
churches.  —  See  Councils  ;  Legislation. 

1  Works,  iii.  220—222.     =  Page  21. 

SYNODS,  for  what  purposes  lawful,  and  for  what 
unlaiuful.  —  Goodwin,  in  his  Church  Government,* 
argues  that  it  is  lawful  to  ask  needed  advice  even 
of  synods  assembled  for  further  and  unauthorized 
purposes,  but  not  to  subject  ourselves  to  them.    He 


SYNODS.  357 

says  :  "  If  any  new  cases  fall  out,  let  the  churches 
advise;"  but  maintains  that  they  have  no  need  to 
advise  where  they  know  the  rule  and  the  facts,  much 
less  to  subject  themselves  to  synod,  where  God  has 
made  their  duty  plain  and  positive.  Davenport,  in 
his  Power  of  Congregational  Churches,^  says  :  "  If 
a  church,  when  first  gathered,  had  complete  power, 
and  by  the  rising  up  of  other  churches  should  be 
deprived  of  it,  then  the  neighborhood  of  churches 
should  not  be  a  benefit  but  a  disadvantage  to  them. 
If  the  church  want  sufficient  light  or  consent  for  the 
sentence,  then  they  are  to  seek  light  from  others,  by 
their  consent  and  counsel ;  but  still  preserving  the 
power  of  censure  in  the  church,  where  Christ  placed 
it."  Mather  and  Tompson,  in  their  Answer  to 
Herle,^  say  :  "  Let  a  church  have  entireness  of  ju- 
risdiction before  she  hath  neighbors,  and  be  deprived 
of  it  when  God  sends  such  neighbors,  and  by  this 
means  she  sustains  a  loss  by  having  neighbors." 
They  show  that  a  synod  should  not  be  a  power  of 
government  and  jurisdiction,  but  a  power  of  doctrine. 
The  matter  debated  in  Acts  xv.  was  a  matter  of  doc- 
trine, therefore  it  was  no  matter  of  jurisdiction.  The 
Synod  at  the  College  in  New  England,  about  1643, 
decided  that  consultative  synodsare  very  comfortable 
and  necessary  for  the  peace  and  good  of  churches.* 
The  Reasons  of  the  Independents  in  the  Grand 
Debate  in  the  Westminster  Assembly^  say:  '•  The 
scope  and  end  of  Acts  xv.  were  to  give  satisfaction 
to  the  offended  brethren  at  Antioch,  and  dogmati- 
cally to  declare  their  judgments  in  a  difficult  case  of 
conscience,  not  to  put  forth  any  act  of  juridical 


358  SYNODS. 

power  upon  any."  In  their  Dissent  from  the  Pro- 
prositionsof  the  Assembly  concerning  Synods,^  they 
say:  "Although  we  judge  synods  of  great  use  for 
finding  and  declaring  truth  in  difficult  cases,  .  .  . 
yet  .  .  ."  And  they  go  on  to  give  reasons  at  length 
against  subjection  to  synods.  So  Burroughs,  in  his 
Irenicum  ;  ^  Savoy  Confession  ;  ^  Cotton's  Keys  ;  ^ 
Cambridge  Platform  ;  ^°  Higginson's  and  Hub- 
bard's Attestation  to  the  same;"  and  Hutchinson's 
History  of  Massachusetts.^^  Cotton  Mather,  in  his 
Magnalia,'^  says :  "  The  design  of  the  Synod  of 
1637  was  not  jus  dare,  but  only  jus  dicere.''^  —  See 
book  ii.  sect.  4,  at  length. 

*  Pages.  139—145.  =  In  Han.  ii.  65.  ^  ib.  173,  174.  •»  Letter 
from  a  minister  in  New  England  to  one  in  Old  England,  in  Reply- 
to  A.  S.  (Simon  Ash),  in  ib.  343.  ^  Ib.  483.  «  Ib.  497.  '  Ib.  iii. 
111.  8  Ib.  548.  »  Pages  6,  7.  ^°  Chap.  xvi.  sect.  1,  2.  ^^  Ib.  70. 
12  Vol.  i.  372.     ^3  Vol.  ii.  443. 

SYNODS  have  no  power  to  excommunicate  churches. 
Goodwin  shows  this  at  length,  book  v.  chapter  xi. : 
"  They  receive  their  power  to  become  a  church  from 
Christ  alone,  and  he  only  can  remove  their  candle- 
stick out  of  its  place."  So  Cambridge  Platform, 
chapter  xv.  section  2. 

SYNODS,  standing,  denounced.  —  Goodwin,^  after 
stating  his  grounds  of  dissent  from  juridical  synods, 
proceeds  to  answer  objections,  as  that  the  neighbor- 
churches  have  an  interest  indirectly  in  the  decisions. 
Ans. :  "  So  have  all  the  churches  in  the  world."  In 
the  multitude  of  counsellors  there  is  strength.  He 
replies  :  Let  them,  then,  have  the  use  of  counsellors 


SYNODS.  859 


only,  and  we  deny  it  not ;  men  will  not  go  for  coun- 
sel, unless  there  be  need.  Is  it  inquired,  May  we 
not  submit  to  such  synods  for  the  sake  of  peace  ? 
Ans. :  If  it  be  an  indifferent  matter,  we  may  submit, 
but  may  not  submit  not  to  do  our  own  duty,  nor 
give  away  our  own  liberty.  It  is  asked.  Will  it  not 
be  better  to  have  a  standing  council,  of  whom  to 
ask  advice  beforehand,  and  prevent  offence  ?  He 
shows  from  Jerome  that  this  has  been  tried,  and  all 
at  last  referred  to  one  man,  and  so  prelacy  was  set 
up.  Barrowe,  in  his  Discovery  of  a  False  Church,^ 
denounces  their  "  select  classis  of  ministers,  and 
their  settled  supreme  council."  Savoy  Confession, 
chapter  on  Institution  of  Churches,  article  xxvii.,' 
says :  "  Besides  these  occasional  synods  or  coun- 
cils, there  are  not  instituted  by  Christ  any  stated 
synods." 

»  Ch.  Gov.  147—149.     «  in  Han.  i.  46.     '^  lb.  iu.  548. 


SYNODS,  cautions  concerning'.  —  Cotton,  in  his 
Keys,'  after  recommending  occasional  consociations, 
councils,  or  synods,  with  limited  powers,  says :  "  Give 
us  leave  to  add  this  caution,  —  to  see  that  this  con- 
sociation be  not  perverted  either  to  the  oppression  or 
diminution  of  the  just  liberty  and  authority  of  each 
particular  church."  Davenport,  in  his  Apologetical 
Reply,^  urges  the  same  caution,  in  nearly  the  same 
words. 

*  Page  105.     *  Page  225. 

SYNODS,  subordination  of,  denounced.  —  See  Sy- 
nods not  juridical. 


360  TEAdbBR. 

SWEARING.  —  See  Oath. 

TEACHER  or  DOCTOR,  his  office.  — The  True 
Description  of  the  Visible  Church,  &c.^  makes  it, 
to  build,  upon  the  true  groundwork,  gold,  silver, 
precious  stones ;  to  take  special  care  to  keep  the 
church  free  from  errors,  revealing  the  wood,  hay, 
and  stubble  of  false  teachers ;  and  to  declare  his  doc- 
trine so  plainly,  simply,  and  purely,  that  the  church 
may  grow  thereby.  Brad&haw,  in  his  English  Puri- 
tanism,^ though  he  makes  the  pastor  the  main  officer 
in  the  church,  says  :  "  There  should  also  be,  in  every 
church,  a  doctor  to  instruct  and  catechize  the  igno- 
rant in  the  main  principles  of  religion."  Hooker, 
in  his  Survey,^  says  :  "  Many  confine  the  teacher's 
work  to  the  school."  But  he  argues  that  it  extends 
to  perfecting  the  whole  body  of  the  church ;  that, 
with  the  pastor,  he  has  a  right  to  administer  the 
sacraments ;  the  aim  and  scope  of  the  doctor  is  to 
inform  the  judgment,  deliver  fundamental  points  of 
Christian  faith,  and  handle  controversies  between 
the  church  and  her  adversaries.  —  See  Officers  ; 
Teacher  distinct  from  pastor. 

»  In  Punchard's  Hist.  368.     =*  In  Neal,  i.  249.     =«  Part  ii.  20—22. 

TEACHER,  is  his  office  distinct  from  pastor  ?  — 
Goodwin,  in  his  Church  Government,^  answers  the 
plea  that  they  were  one  and  the  same,  by  insisting 
that  the  Greeks  used  kai  disjunctively  at  the  end  of 
a  disjunctive  enumeration,  and  applies  it  to  Eph.  iv. 
11.  ( Query y  Is  the  enumeration  strictly  disjunctive  ?) 
Cambridge  Platform  ^  says :  "  The  office  of  pastor 


TEACHER.  361 

and  teacher  appears  to  be  distinct."    (See  ib.  on 
Pastor,  his  office.)     Johnson,  in  his  Treatise  on  the 
Reformed  Churches,'  argues  that  they  are  distinct, 
from  Eph.  iv.  11 ;  1  Cor.  xii.  5, 6 ;  with  Rom.  xii.  7, 8. 
He  says  that  the  distinctive  particle  is  used  in  Eph. 
iv.  11  in  the  Syriac  translation,  which  is  the  oldest. 
Baillie  "^  says :  ".The  Independents  were  for  a  doctor 
in  every  congregation,  as  well  as  a  pastor.  .  .  .  The 
absolute   necessity  of  a  doctor  was,  however,  es- 
chewed (by  the  Westminster  Assembly) ;  yet,  where 
two  ministers  could  be  had,  one  was  allowed,  ac- 
cording to  his  gift,  to  apply  himself  more  to  teach- 
ing, and  the  other  to  exhortation,  according  to  the 
Scriptures."     Cotton  Mather,  in   his  Ratio  Disci- 
plinsB,*  says  that,  "  when  there  were  two  ministers 
to  a  church,  one  of  them  was  formerly  distinguished 
by  the  name  of  teacher.  .  .  .  More  lately,  the  distinc- 
tion is  less  regarded ;  their  being  mentioned  so  as 
they  are  together  in  the  Sacred  Oracles  (Eph.  iv.  11) 
pleaded  for  little  short  of  an  identity  between  them." 
The  distinction  has  now  gone  into  practical  disuse. 
(See  Punchard's  View,  80.)     I.  Chauncy^  contends 
that  "the  pastoral  office  comprehends  the  whole 
ministry  of  the  church ;  but  if,  by  reason  of  infir- 
mity, or  the  size  of  the  church,  the  pastor  is  unable 
to  do  the  whole  work,  he  may  have  aid  or  helps, — 
a  teacher  to  aid  him  in  preaching,  or  a  ruling  elder 
to   assist  in  ruling.     He  that  is  called  to  concur 
with  the  pastor  in  teaching,  waits  on  that  service, 
1  Pet.  iv.  10, 11 ;  and  he  that  is  called  on  to  concur 
with  him  in  ruling  is  to  wait  on  that  work  espe- 
cially."    And  ^  "  a  church  that  hath  a  pastor  and 

31 


362  TOLERATION. 

deacon  is  fully  organized,  the  church  requiring  no 
more  to  edification;  the  pastoral  office  containing 
in  it  all  the  teaching  and  ruling  charge,  and  the 
deacon's  all  that  concerns  the  care  of  the  church  as 
to  externals."  Eaton  and  Taylor,  in  their  De- 
fence,^ say:  "There  must  be  pastors  distinct  from 
teachers."  Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing  :  ^ 
"  They  generally  hold  pastor  and  teacher  distinct.^^ 

»  Page  288.  '  Chap.  vi.  sect.  5.  ^  In  Han.  i.  316.  "  lb.  ii.  217. 
'*  Pages  42,  43.  «  Divine  Inst.  Cong.  Churches,  61.  'lb.  62. 
*  Page  69.     ^  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  iii.  65. 

• 

TITHES,  involuntary  ones  unlawful.  —  Jacob's 
Church,  in  their  Confession,  art.  xxvi.,*  say :  "  We 
believe  tithes  for  the  pastor's  maintenance  under 
the  gospel  are  not  the  just  and  due  means  thereof." 
They,  however,  assert  that  they  do  not  deem  them 
unlawful,  if  they  remain  voluntary.  "  And  so  of 
other  set  maintenance  established  by  temporal 
laws."  They  recommend  that  it  be  done  "by  vo- 
luntary conscionable  contributions."  The  Army 
Scruples  ^  say :  "  They  should  pay  ministers  who 
employ  them.  .  .  .  They  should  not  be  paid  by 
forced  tithes."  Roger  Williams,  in  his  Hireling 
Ministry  None  of  Christ's,^  says :  "  The  civil  au- 
thority cannot  lawfully  enforce  the  payment  of 
tithes,  nov  prevent  those  who  choose." — See  Mini- 
sters, maintenance  of. 

»  Han.  i.  301.    *  Page  16.    ^  Page  26. 

TOLERATION  desired.^ K  committee  of  Pres- 
byterians, in  the  Westminster  Assembly,  say,^  with 


TOLERATION.  363 

apparent  surprise,  that  it  seems  to  them  "  the  Inde- 
pendents desire  liberty  of  conscience  not  only  for 
themselves,  but  for  all  men."  Mr.  Burroughs  re- 
plied, if  they  might  not  have  liberty  to  govern  them- 
selves in  their  own  way,  as  long  as  they  behaved 
peaceably  towards  the  civil  government,  they  were 
resolved  to  suffer,  or  to  go  to  some  other  place  of 
the  world  where  they  might  enjoy  their  liberty. 
"  But,  while  men  think  the  civil  sword  an  otdinance 
of  God  to  determine  all  controversies  of  divinity, 
and  that  it  must  needs  be  attended  with  fines  and 
imprisonment  to  the  disobedient,  .  .  .  there  must  be 
a  base  subjection  of  men's  consciences  to  slavery,  a 
suppression  of  much  truth,  and  great  disturbances 
in  the  Christian  world."  An  Independent  writer,'^ 
in  Answer  to  the  London  divines,  says :  "  The  mi- 
nisters say,  if  we  tolerate  one  sect,  we  must  tolerate 
all.  .  .  .  True,  .  .  .  and  men  have  as  good  a  right  to 
the  liberty  of  their  consciences  as  to  their  clothes 
or  estates,  no  opinions  being  cognizable  by  the 
civil  magistrate  any  further  than  they  are  inconsis- 
tent with  the  civil  government.  .  .  .  Can  Bedlam  or 
the  Fleet  open  men's  understandings,  and  reduce 
them  from  error?"  So  he  goes  on  with  equal 
point  and  truth.  Edwards,  in  his  Gangrsenae,^ 
classes  together  "  denying  the  Scriptures  and  plead- 
ing for  toleration  of  all  religions."  He  ^  puts  the 
Independents  at  the  head  of  all  sectaries,  because 
"  they  were  for  the  toleration  of  all  Christians  who 
agreed  in  the  fundamentals  of  religion."  The  ordi- 
nance in  the  time  of  the  Protectorate*  provides, 
art.  xxxvi.,  "  that  none  be  compelled  to  conform 


364  TOLERATION. 

to  the  public  religion  by  penalties  or  otherwise." 
Art.  xxxvii.  protects  all  men  in  the  profession  of 
their  faith,  and  exercise  of  their  religion,  "  so  as  they 
do  not  abuse  this  liberty  to  the  civil  injury  of  others, 
and  the  actual  disturbance  of  the  public  peace; 
provided  this  liberty  do  not  extend  to  Popery  or 
Prelacy,  or  to  such  as,  under  profession  of  Christ, 
hold  forth  and  practise  licentiousness."  Consider- 
ing what  Popery  and  Prelacy  had  done,  it  is  not 
strange  that  the  first  legislators  for  liberty  did  not 
distinguish  between  tolerating  principles  and  tole- 
rating overt  acts  of  iniquity.  Burton,  in  his  An- 
swer to  Prynne,  says :  ®  "  The  magistrates  may  not 
tolerate  open  Papacy  and  idolatry  to  be  set  up  in 
the  land ;  but  the  conscience  of  a  Papist  they  are 
no  masters  or  judges  of.  .  .  .  Evil  actions  he  must 
punish."  Baillie,  writing  from  the  Westminster 
Assembly,^  says  :  "  The  Independents  had  nearly 
carried  a  toleration  of  their  way ;  but  the  legerde- 
main, being  perceived,  was  crashed."  He  says :  ^ 
"  They  plead  for  the  toleration  of  other  sects  as 
well  as  their  own."(!)  Lord  Brooke,  in  his  Dis- 
course on  Episcopacy,^  says :  "  So  long  as  the 
church,  in  her  church  tenets,  intermeddleth  not 
with  state  matters  under  the  notion  of  religion,  I 
suppose  the  state  is  not  to  interpose."  —  See  two 
next  succeeding  articles. 

»  In  Neal's  Puritans,  ii.  17.    "  lb.  19.    ^  lb.  37.    *  lb.  38.    ^  lb. 
135.    «  In  Han.  ii.  402.    '  lb.  547.    "  lb.  558.    »  lb.  126. 

TOLERATION,  why  not  universal  at  first  in  New 
England,  —  In  the  work  entitled  The  Independents 


TOLERATION.  365 

Accused  and  Acquitted,  by  a  member  of  John  Good- 
win's Church,  it  is  said :  ^  "  I  suppose  it  is  easier  to 
affirm  than  to  prove  that  any  in  New  England  were 
imprisoned  and  banished  merely  for  their  conscien- 
ces." Welde,  in  his  Answer  to  Rathband,^  denies 
that  "  any  have  been  dealt  with  for  dissenting  from 
us  in  matters  of  discipline."  Katherine  Chidley,  in 
her  Answer  to  Edwards  (wounding  him  as  with  a 
millstone  from  a  wall),  says:^  "It  may  be,  that 
there  be  some  there  who  have  taken  it  upon  them 
to  bend  men's  consciences,  as  you  and  your  fellows 
do  here."  She  suggests  that  "  there  might  be  fear, 
that,  upon  complaint  made  for  disorder,  in  suffering 
the  liberty  of  the  .gospel  there,  they  might  have 
been  sent  back,  .  .  .  and  committed  to  the  same 
stinking  prison  here  in  London,  there  to  have  been 
murdered,  as  divers  of  the  Lord's  people  have  been 
of  late  years."  This  Hanbury  represents  as  throw- 
ing "  a  blaze  of  light  on  their  conduct,  which  seemed 
to  be  inexcusable  with  their  principles  and  profes- 
sion." RadclifFe,  Gardner,  and  Morton,  who  had 
been  sent  back  for  misdemeanors,  were  actually  in 
1633  petitioning  the  king  and  council  against  them, 
and  representing  them  as  seditious.*  Besides,  most 
of  the  Massachusetts  Planters  had  been  educated 
to  believe  in  the  necessity  of  purifying  the  church 
with  the  sword.  They  had  not  yet  learned  that  it 
was  lawful  to  tolerate  any  who  did  not  hold  the 
essentials  of  religion ;  and,  even  in  this,  they  had 
advanced  beyond  almost  all  who  had  preceded  them 
since  the  commencement  of  the  dark  ages.  Yet 
there  are  who  seem  vexed  with  them  for  not  learn- 

31» 


366  TOLERATION. 

ing  every  thing  in  an  hour.  Such  persons  might 
as  well  term  the  ancient  Greeks  and  Romans  be- 
sotted savages,  because  they  had  no  railroads  or 
steamboats,  and  Newton  and  Franklin  dolts,  be- 
cause they  never  discovered  the  magnetic  telegraph 
nor  the  electro-magnetic  light.  They  wonder  that 
those  who  had  already  bared  their  necks  to  the 
halter,  and  their  breasts  to  the  sword,  should  not 
have  made  sure  their  own  execution  by  retaining 
within  their  patent  those  whose  conduct  would 
surely  have  affixed  on  them  the  imputation  of  doc- 
trines which  themselves  did  not  believe,  and  prac- 
tices which  they  could  not  approve,  though  they 
would  many  of  them  have  gladly  tolerated  these 
things  if  they  could.  Chimney-corner  soldiers  of 
this  day  would  have  fought  the  battle  of  liberty 
better  than  they  did.  Some,  moreover,  demand 
that  the  principles  of  Congregationalism  should 
cure  all  the  depravity  and  Diotrephesian  spirit  of 
all  who  hoist  its  colors,  or  take  hold  of  its  skirts,  or 
live  near  where,  it  is  professed ;  forgetting  the  say- 
ing of  Luther,  "  Every  man  has  a  little  pope  in  his 
own  belly."  But,  with  all  its  faults,  or  rather  the 
faults  of  its  professors,  we  fearlessly  challenge  the 
showing  of  equal  fruits  of  civil  and  religious  liberty, 
growing  out  of  any  other  principles,  since  the  world 
was  made.  —  See  next  preceding  and  next  succeed- 
ing articles. 

»  In  Han.  ii.  546.    '  lb.  298.       lb.  112.    *  Hubbard's  History 
Mass.  153. 

TOLERATION,  how  far  should  it  be  practised  by 


TOLERATION.  367 

a  state  ?  —  Burroughs,  in  his  Irenicum,*  says :  "  The 
devil  must  not  be  let  alone  because  he  is  got  inta 
men's  consciences ;  ...  if  a  man's  error  be  danger- 
ous to  the  state,  he  may  be  cut  off ; . . .  errorists,  who 
by  any  means  do  not  serve  the  state,  may  be  de- 
prived of  some  privileges."  He  acknowledges  it 
"  hard  to  cut  in  the  right  joint "  in  this  case.  The 
difficulty,  doubtless,  lay  in  not  distinguishing  between 
mere  error  and  seditious  overt  acts,  as  ground  for 
punishment.  Hanbury  ^  describes  at  large  the  doings 
of  the  London  ministers  in  the  Westminster  As- 
sembly against  toleration.  The  case  of  Roger  Wil- 
liams has  been  much  insisted  on,  as  an  instance  of 
the  anti-tolerating  spirit  of  our  fathers.  Ity  however,, 
needs  proof  that  the  main  cause  was  ecclesiastical. 
Winthrop  ^  says  the  governor  and  assistants  were 
doubtful  of  the  lawful  use  of  the  cross,  but  con- 
demned the  manner  of  Mr.  Williams's  proceedings  ;' 
therefore  they  wrote  to  Mr.  Downing  in  England, 
excusing  themselves,  expressing  their  dislike  of  the 
thing,  and  their  determination  to  punish  the  offend- 
ers. As  for  his  Baptist  principles  being  the  cause, 
it  wa?  an  afterthought.  He  was  converted  to  these 
after  he  went  to  Rhode  Island  in  1638,  and  re- 
nounced his  connection  with  the  Baptist  order  in. 
1639.'*  Dunster  and  Chauncy,  the  first  two  presi- 
dents of  Harvard  College,  held,  one  to  believers 
baptism  only,  and  the  other  to  immersion.  It  is, 
therefore,  preposterous  to  assert  that  even  a  supposed 
leaning  of  Williams  that  way  could  have  been  the 
cause  of  his  banishment.  "  He  spftke  dangerous 
words  against  the  patent."  *     Professor  Knowles,  in 


368  TOLERATION. 

his  Life  of  Williams,^  says  :  "  He  was  charged  with 
insisting  that  the  charter  ought  to  be  returned  to  the 
king."  This,  he  says, "  would  have  been  very  unwise ; 
but  we  can  hardly  believe  that  he  would  carry  his 
opposition  to  this  unreasonable  length."  And  is  it 
credible,  both  that  this  positive  testimony  was  false, 
and  that  he  was  banished  for  an  opposition  which 
was  not  "  unreasonable  "  ?  Knowles  condemns 
cutting  the  cross  out  of  the  king's  colors,  but  says  : 
"  We  have  no  evidence  that  Williams  advised  to  it." 
What,  then,  are  we  to  think  of  the  accusations  of 
his  cotemporaries,  which  Williams  did  not  deny  ? 
Probably  Williams  would  have  scorned  to  have  even 
put  them  upon  the  proof  of  the  fact.  Knowles  be- 
lieves the  true  reason  of  his  banishment  to  have  been 
the  doctrine  that  the  civil  power  had  no  control  over 
conscience.  But  this  doctrine,  though  not  universal, 
was  no  novelty  at  that  time  ;  Professor  Knowles  to 
the  contrary.  He  shows  ^  that  "  Cotton  and  his  as- 
sociates argued  that  they  ought  to  promote  truth  and 
oppose  error  by  all  the  methods  in  their  power." 
This  was  their  true  error.  In  the  end  he  gives  the 
righteous  verdict,  that  Williams  was  unnecessarily 
scrupulous,  and  his  opponents  thought  it  duty  to 
vindicate  what  they  thought  to  be  truth.  He  might 
have  added  their  necessity,  from  the  operations  of 
their  enemies  with  the  company,  king,  and  parlia- 
ment, at  the  very  time  that  an  insult  had  been  offered 
to  the  king's  colors.  Williams  himself,  in  his  Bloody 
Tenet,^  shows  that  God's  ministers  are  able  to  kill 
"  spiritual  wokes  only  with  spiritual  weapons." 
Cotton,  in  his  Bloody  Tenet  Washed,^  affirms  that 


TOLERATION.  369 

"  fundamentals  are  so  clear,  that  a  man  cannot  but 
in  conscience  be  convinced  of  them,  after  two  or 
three  admonitions."  He  undertakes  to  show,*°  that 
the  prosperity  of  the  church  is  inseparably  con- 
nected with  the  civil  power.  Williams,  in  his 
Answer  to  Cotton's  Letter,  says,"  that  one  of  the 
magistrates,  on  summing  up  the  case,  said  :  Mr. 
Williams  holds  these  four  things  :  "  1.  We  have 
not  our  land  by  patent  from  the  king,  but  the 
natives  are  the  true  owners  of  it ;  *  and  we  oujjht 
to  repent  having  received  it  by  such  a  patent. 
2.  It  is  not  lawful  to  call  a  wicked  man  to  pray  or 
swear,  as  being  contrary  unto  God's  worship.  3.  It 
is  not  lawful  to  hear  any  of  the  ministers  of 
the  parish  assemblies  in  England.  4.  That  the 
civil  magistrates'  power  extends  only  to  the  bodies 
and  goods  and  outward  estates  of  men,  dec."  Cot- 
ton, in  his  Answer,*^  denies  that  these  four  things 
were  the  cause  of  his  banishment,  and  knows  not 
what  magistrate  asserted  it.  The  two  first,  many 
if  not  most,  of  the  colony  admit ;  and  there  are 
many  who  hold  the  two  latter,  who  are  still  tolerated 


*  John  Q.  Adams,  in  his  Plymouth  Anniversary  Oration,  page 
23,  says  :  "What  right  has  the  huntsman  of  the  forest  to  the  thou- 
sand miles  over  which  he  has  accidentally  ranged  in  quest  of  prey  ? 
Shall  he  not  only  resist  civilization  himself,  but  prevent  the 
cultivation  of  whole  countries  ?  He  shows  that  our  fathers  fairly 
bought  what  they  took  from  the  natives.  He  also  demonstrates 
the  same  truth,  in  a  masterly  manner,  in  his  Second  Century 
Oration  at  Boston,  in  Historical  Society's  Collection,  series  iii. 
vol.  ix.  196,  197.  But  not  so,  as  he  shows  elsewhere  in  this 
oration,  was  the  seizing-their  cultivated  country,  and  forcing  them 
beyond  the  Mississippi,  by  the  present  generation. 


i 


370  TOLERATION. 

here.  He  asserts*^  that  "  it  was  for  his  tumultuous 
carriage  against  the  patent,  and  his*  violently  with- 
standing the  oath  of  fidelity.''  Cotton  denies  havi  ng 
had  a  hand  in  his  banishment,  but  not  that  the 
magistrates  may  punish  for  sins  against  conscience. 
Williams  says,  in  his  Answer  to  Cotton's  Letter,'* 
that  personally  he  honors  and  loves  Cotton,  and 
speaks  of  him  as,  otherwise  than  his  persecuting 
tenets,  an  excellent  and  worthy  man.  He  com- 
plains^* that  Cotton  addresses  him  as  beloved  in 
Christ,  and  "  denies  him  a  common  air  to  breathe." 
Cotton  was  evidently  wrong  in  supposing  that  men 
may  be  civilly  punished  for  the  alleged  crime  of 
sinning  against  their  own  consciences ;  and  Wil- 
liams, in  supposing  that  he  might  act  against  the 
charter,  thereby  endangering  the  charter  privileges  of 
his  fellow-citizens,  and  not  be  molested  by  the  civil 
law.  (For  a  succinct  account  of  this  controversy, 
see  Remarks  on  the  History  of  Salem,  in  Historical 
Society's  Collection,  series  i.  vol.  vii.  Prefix  iii. — v.) 
Upham's  Life  of  Sir  H.  Vane,  the  Younger,^ ^  says  : 
"  It  was  for  religious  freedom,  in  a  peculiar  sense, 
that  our  fathers  contended.  They  were  faithful  to 
the  cause,  as  they  understood  it.  The  true  principle 
of  religious  liberty,  in  its  wide  and  full  comprehen- 
sion, had  never  dawned  upon  their  minds."  Cal- 
lender,  in  his  Historical  Discourse,^^  says  ;  "  It  was 
not  the  peculiar  fault  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts 
to  think  themselves  bound  in  conscience  to  use  the 
sword  of  the  civil  magistrate  to  open  understandings. 
. .  .  All  other  Christian  sects  acted  as  though  they 
thought  this  the  very  best  service  they  could  do  to 


TOLERATION.  371 

God."  Philip  Nye,  in  his  Lawfumess  of  the  Oath 
of  Supremacy,  &c.,*^  says  :  "  All  men  are  by  nature 
equal ;"  yet  he  argues  the  right  of  kings  to  govern 
in  ecclesiastical  affairs.  He  asserts  ^^  that  no  ruler, 
civil  or  ecclesiastical,  has  power  to  enforce  the  soul, 
and  still "°  maintains  that  the  magistrate  is  keeper 
of  both  tables.*  Wisner,  in  his  History  of  the  Old 
South  Church,  says  no  instance  existed  in  the  days 
of  our  fathers,  without  an  established  religion.  In- 
stead of  railing  at  them  for  their  blindness,  we  should 
wonder  that  they  were  so  far  advanced.  How 
natural  to  say.  Go,  plant  your  principles  somewhere 
else.  He  quotes  Magnalia,  book  vii.  24  :  "  Even  the 
Quakers  would  say,  if  they  had  gotten  into  a  corner 
of  the  world,  and  at  great  toil  and  charge  made  a 
wilderness  habitable,  on  purpose  to  be  there  undis- 
turbed in  their  worship,  they  would  never  love  to 
have  the  New  Englanders  come  among  them,  and 
disturb  their  public  worship."  This  the  Quakers 
did  in  the  New  England  Congregations  :  ^^  women 
came  into  the  congregations  ;  some  blacked,  others 
naked.  These  were  overt  acts,  which  would  ensure 
civil  interference  at  this  day.  Our  fathers,  in  their 
act  against  them,  assign  as  a  motive  a  fear  that 
the  "  scenes  of  Munster  might  be  repeated  here." 
Alden  Bradford,  in  his  Plymouth  Anniversary  Ora- 
tion,^^  asserts  that  the  severities  of  persecutions 
were  never  known  in  New  Plymouth  Colony. 
Still  there  were  then  severe  laws  against  Quakers. 
(See  Plymouth  Colony  Laws.)  Even  in  Rhode 
Island,  the  rights  of  Protestant  citizens  were  not 
♦  Our  fathers  saw  not  the  full  consequences  of  their  tenets. 


372  TOLERATION. 

extended  to  Catholics  till  1783.^^*     Cartwright,  on 
Toleration,^*  argues    that    "  the    blasphemer    and 
stubborn  idolater  ought  to  be  put  to  death."     He 
argues  at  length  for  the  perpetuity  of  Moses's  law ; 
and  that  for  a  magistrate  to  tolerate  a  seducer  was 
to  undo  the  word  of  God  where  he  sat  in  judg- 
ment.     Ward,  in  his  Simple  Cobbler  of  Agawam, 
argues  that  it  is  treason  against  God  to  tolerate 
error  in  fundamentals.      Locke,  in  his  Letters  on 
Toleration,"  shows   that   the   argument,  founding 
the    right   of    magistrates    to  enforce  religion   on 
that  of  parents  and  instructors   to  prescribe   and 
enforce  studies,  fails ;   because  this  right  continues 
only  during  minority  of  children.     He  shows^^  that, 
if  one  magistrate  may  use  force,  then  all  may  use 
it,  and  ought  to  use  it,  to  enforce  the  religion  they 
believe  to  be  true.     He  asserts  ^^  that  a  right  to  use 
force  in  this  matter  implies  that  he  who  uses  it  is  an 
infallible  guide.    And,  if  he  ought  to  use  it  to  induce 
to  believe,  then  still  more  to  induce  to  embrace  the 
true  religion.     He  says  :  ^^  To  punish  for  rejecting 
the  true  religion,  the  magistrate  must  judge  what 
the  true  religion  is.     So,  if  the  true  religion  is  every 
where  the  national,  they  must  punish  differently  in 
different  countries.     Again  : "  "  You  tell  us  that,  by 
the  law  of  nature,  magistrates  are  obliged  to  promote 

*  Professor  Gammell,  in  his  Biography  of  Roger  Williams  (in 
Sparks's  Am.  Biog.  ser.  ii.,  vol.  iv.  210),  sets  down  the  clause 
excepting  Catholics  from  citizenship,  as  an  interpolation  of  the 
Rhode  Island  Records.  He  does  this  on  negative  evidence.  Rev. 
J.  B.  Felt  has  pointed  the  compiler  to  the  law  itself,  published  in 
1744,  of  which  an  entire  copy  is  in  the  library  of  the  Massachu- 
setts Historical  Society. 


TRANSLATION.  373 

the  true  religion.  What,  then,  is  the  Emperor  of 
Peru  obliged  to  do,  who  was  not  so  much  as  within 
hearing  of  the  Christian  religion  ?  "  —  See  last  two 
succeeding  articles. 

» In  Han.  iii.  109—112.  ^  lb.  97—125.  =»  Journal,  i.  150.  *  lb. 
293— 307;  and  Hubbard,  207,208.  ^  Hubbard,  206.  »  Pages  60— 
80.  7  lb.  76.  8  Page  115.  »  Page  9.  i°  Pages  10,  11.  "Page 
375.  »'  Page  26.  ^'^  Page  27.  ^"^  Pages  367,  368.  '^  Page  370. 
"InSparks'sAm.Biog.iv.  147.  ^TPageld.  >' Page  17.  ^'^Page 
32.  20  Page  43.  ^i  Page  86.  ^  Page  10.  ^  Repeal  of  Act  of 
Disability,  in  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  v.  243,  244 ;  and  R.  I. 
Laws,  1744.  3,  4.  ^  Page  4.  ^5  pages  161,  162.  ^e  p^gg  265. 
27  Pages  289,  290.    '^  Page  303.     ^a  Page  399. 


TRADITION  (i.  e.  example)^  apostolic ^  binding. — 
Jacob's  Church,  in  their  Confession,  art.  xvii.,*  say 
that  every  ordinance  or  institution  apostolic,  out  of 
the  Scriptures,  is  of  divine  authority. 

» In  Han.  i.  298. 

TRADITION,  superstitious.  —  John  Robinson,  in 
his  Posthumous  Work,^  represents  some  as  so  car- 
ried away  with  their  former  guides,  that  they  think 
it  half-heresy  to  call  in  question  any  of  their  declara- 
tions or  practices.  "  We  must  not  think  that  only 
Pharisees  and  Papists  are  superstitious,  and  addicted 
to  the  traditions  of  the  elders  and  the  authority  of 
the  church." 

» In  Han.  i.  452 ;  and  Works,  iiii  355,  356. 

TRANSLATION.  —  Hanbury  ^  asserts  tha|  the 
Congregationalists  complain  that  King  James  re- 
quired the  translators  to  use  the  old  ecclesiastical 
S2 


374  TYPES.      ^ 

words  ;  as,  for  instance,  to  pur  church  for  congrega- 
tion^ thus  making  the  translation  a  sectarian  one. 
The  Defence  of  the  Petition  for  Refornaation '  com- 
plains that,  while  the  Geneva  and  former  church 
translation  renders  Acts  xiv.  23,  "  And  when  they 
had  ordained  them  elders  hy  election,^^  our  new 
translation  leaves  out  the  words  "  by  election ; "  and 
that  in  1  Cor.  xii.  28,  where  it  was  formerly  govern- 
ors^ it  is  now  translated  governments.  So  Doddridge 
in  locis ;  see  also  Dr.  Bacon's  Church  Manual,  21 ; 
and  for  a  learned  and  critical  handling  of  the  ques- 
tion, Coleman's  Primitive  Church,  chap.  iv.  —  See 
Ordination,  imposition  of  /lands. 

1  Han.  i.  2,  note.    *  Address  to  the  Reader,  in  ib.  i.  131. 

TREASURY,  what  may  he  put  into  it  ?  —  Smith, 
after  his  defection,  maintained  ^  that  "  they  that  are 
without,  if  they  would  give  any  thing,  must  lay  it 
apart  severally  for  the  treasury,  and  it  must  be  em- 
ployed to  common  use."  Ainsworth  replied,  that 
goods  gotten  by  violence,  extortion,  murder,  theft, 
or  the  like  evil  way,  may  not  be  put  into  the  trea- 
sury, even  though  the  members  of  the  church  do 
offer  them.  He  supposes  that  the  example  of  Matt. 
xxvii.  6,  7,  will  not  bear  us  out  in  appropriating  to 
common  use  all  unbelievers'  gifts. 

^  Han.  i.  184. 

TYPES.  —  Goodwin,  in  his  Church  Government,* 
sho#s  that  an  Old  Testament  one  applies  to  an  in- 
stitution under  the  New,  just  so  far  as  God  applies 
it,  and  no  farther ;  otherwise  we  are  led  away  by 


UNIFORMITY.  375 

endless  fanciful   analogies.  —  See  Dr.  Emmons's 
Sermon  on  Heb.  x.  9,  in  Works,  v.  427. 

»  Page  173. 

UNANIMITY,  is  it  necessary  in  church  acts  ?  — 
Welde,  in  his  Answer  to  Rathband,^  shows  that  in 
the  admission  of  members,  if  some  few  be  dissatis- 
fied, they  used  to  submit  to  tlie  rest,  and  sit  down 
in  their  acts.  Letchford,  in  his  Plain  Dealing,^ 
says :  "  In  Boston,  they  commonly  rule  by  unani- 
mous consent,  if  they  can  ;  in  Salem,  by  majorities." 
Punchard,  in  his  View,'  says  :  "  It  is  not  common 
to  settle  questions  of  great  importance  by  the  vote 
of  a  bare  majority.  A  greater  degree  of  unanimity 
is  usually  sought,  and  generally  obtained."  In  a 
note  he  informs  us,  from  Rev.  A.  Carson's  Reason 
for  Separating  from  the  Synod  of  Ulster,  that  Con- 
gregationalists  in  "  Ireland  consider  entire  unanimity 
indispensable."  It  may  be  easily  perceived  that  this 
doctrine  puts  a  veto  into  the  hands  of  any  ill-dis- 
posed member.  —  See  Majorities  ;  Minorities. 

*  In  Han.  ii.  302.     ^  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  iii.  vol.  iii.  74. 
'  Page  170. 

UNIFORMITY,  how  far  attainable  and  desirable. 
Goodwin,  in  his  Church  Government,^  argues  it 
prejudicial  to  oblige  either  to  a  national  or  presby- 
terial  uniformity,  and  oblige,  for  uniformity's  sake, 
to  the  same  pitch  and  model  that  one  church  should 
not  practise  further  than  another.  The  apostle's 
rule  is,  that,  so  far  as  we  have  attained^  we  should 
all  walk  by  the  same  rule.     And  the  churches  may 


376  UNION. 

establish  a  common  rule  among  them,  so  far  as  they 
have  attained  ;  but,  if  any  be  otherwise  minded, 
they  should  wait  till  God  shall  reveal  this  in  its 
time.  Otherwise  the  churches  will  grow  corrupt, 
because  the  greater  part  is  still  more  corrupt.  The 
general  Scripture  rule  is  made  in  favor  of  the  weak, 
not  against  them.  The  Desires  of  the  Indepen- 
dents^ argiies  uniformity  attainable,  so  far  as 
described  in  Phil.  iii.  16  ;  and  that,  beyond  this,  all 
efforts  at  it  will  prove  perfect  tyranny.  C.  Upham, 
in  his  Century  Sermon,'  thinks  that  uniformity 
might  be  lost  by  a  coercive  course,  if  that  could  be 
lost  which  was  never  gained.  Cotton  Mather,  in 
his  Ratio  Disciplinae,*  condemns  those  who,  with 
Phaetonic  fury,  would  set  the  world  on  fire  to  pro- 
mote it.  He  quotes  Irenaeus :  "  A  diversity  in 
lesser  matters  commends  a  church  persevering  in 
the  unity  of  the  faith."  Dr.  Bacon,  in  his  Church 
Manual,*  says  :  "  The  only  security  for  uniformity 
is  dead  indifference.  The  only  security  for  brethren 
that  think  and  inquire  is  love  and  liberty." 

'  Page  236.  »  in  Han.  iii.  64,  65.  '  Page  55.  *  Page  185. 
6  Page  177. 

UNION,  scriptural,  lohat  —  Dr.  Isaac  Barrow,  in 
his  Treatise  on  the  Pope's  Supremacy,  published 
in  1680,^  shows  that  it  does  not  consist  in  being 
under  one  government  politically,  but  in  union  of 
spirit.  Congregationalists  agree  to  these  arguments 
of  this  powerful  Episcopal  writer.  Indeed,  they 
usually  apply  all  the  arguments  of  Episcopalians 
against  Popery,  to  prove  Congregational  principles, 


UNITY.  377 

as  they  do  those  of  Presbyterians  against  Prelacy. 
Robinson,  in  his  parting  address  to  the  Pilgrims,^ 
says :  "  Study  union  with  the  godly  people  of  Eng- 
land in  all  things,  where  you  can  have  it  without 
sin,  rather  than  in  the  least  measure  to  affect  a  di- 
vision or  separation  from  them."  —  See  note  on  the 
efforts  of  Drury,  on  this  point,  in  Eliot's  Biog.  Diet. 
342.  The  original  of  Norton's  letter  there  referred 
to,  with  the  signatures,  is  in  the  Antiquarian  Li- 
brary, Worcester.  —  See  Separation. 

1  In  Han.  i.  11, 12.    ^  ib.  394,  note. 

UNION  of  Christians.  —  Neal,  in  his  History  of 
the  Puritans,^  shows  the  happy  effects  of  the  meet- 
ings of  ministers  of  different  denominations  in 
Worcestershire  and  the  West  of  England  during 
the  protectorate,  upon  general  principles,  not  to 
meddle  with  politics  nor  the  subject  of  the  keys. 
He  shows,  too,  how  these  meetings  were  opposed 
by  the  bigoted  of  the  various  sects.  Had  Baxter, 
the  prime  mover,  always  thus  promoted  peace- 
principles,  instead  of  advocating  civil  non-resist- 
ance, he  had  done  still  more  good  in  this  contentious 
world.  —  See  Resistance. 

» Vol.  ii.  137. 

UNITY,  churchy  ivhat. —  Goodwin,  in  his  Cate- 
chism,* shows  it  to  consist  in  being  of  one  mind 
and  one  heart,  though  every  man  must  speak  as  he 
judgeth,  and  not  prevaricate.  Still  we  must  be  of 
one  heart,  of  a  heart  to  draw  as  close  to  another 
as  may  be,  and  to  drive  it  as  far  as  truth  will  bear. 

32* 


878  USURPATION. 

Lord  King,  in  his  Enquiry,^  shows  that  it  does  not 
consist  in  uniformity  of  rites  and  customs,  nor  of 
consent  to  the  non-essential  points  of  Christianity ; 
and  that  whoever  undertakes  to  enforce  either  of 
these  to  promote  the  unity  of  the  church,  only  therer 
by  violates  the  church's  unity  and  concord;  but 
that  it  does  consist  "  in  a  harmonious  consent  to 
the  essential  articles  of  religion."  Neander,  in  his 
Planting  and  Training  of  the  Church,^  strongly 
intimates  the  same  from  the  decision  of  the  apos- 
tolical assembly  at  Jerusalem.  The  Defence  of 
Matthew  Henry's  Brief  Enquiry  into  the  Nature 
of  Schism  *  says :  "  Moral  unity  of  the  church  con- 
sists in  love,  not  in  adherence  to  the  ministry; 
for  this  would  render  it  impossible  for  the  laity  to 
reform  the  churches."  Polhill,  on  Schism,  shows 
that  the  unity  of  the  church  is  a  divine  thing,  and 
does  not  consist  in  human  rites,  liturgy,  diocesan 
Episcopacy,  nor  the  civil  laws  of  magistrates.  He 
says :  ®  "In  the  first  or  golden  age  of  the  church, 
there  was  little  of  ceremony,  but  much  of  unity." 
Sir  Edwin  Sandys,  in  his  Europae  Speculum,^ 
shows  the  insurmountable  obstacles  to  complete 
outward  unity  in  his  day.    - 

»  Pages  33,  34.    ^  Part  i.  156,  158.    ^  Page  83.    *  Pages  4—6. 
»  Pages  1—23.    «  lb.  10.    "^  Pages  194—210. 

UNITY,  when  perfect.  —  Burroughs,  in  his  Ireni- 
cum,'  says :  "  The  unity  of  the  faith  and  the  per- 
fect man  go  together,  Eph.  iv.  13.     When  that  is 
done,  our  work  is  done  for  this  world.'* 
*  In  Han.  iii.  123. 


VOTERS.  379 

USURPATION,  ecclesiastical^  to  be  resisted  in  the 
beginning: —  Wise,  in  his  Quarrel  of  the  Churches 
Espoused/  urges  the  maxim,  Obsta  principiis  (Resist 
beginnings),  as  a  reason  for  rejecting  the  famous 
Juridical  Proposals  of  1705.  These  he  compares 
to  Aaron's  calf  (the  work  of  a  good  man  for  a  bad 
object),  and  thinks  they  should  be  treated  as  that 
calf  was,  Exod.  xxxii.  20.  He  thinks  that  the  beast 
with  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  was  once  just 
about  such  a  calf,  till  the  potentates  of  the  earth 
reared  it  on  the  choicest  royal  cows,  and  at  length 
tipped  his  horns  with  iron  and  shod  his  hoofs  with 
brass,  till  few  of  them  dare  take  it  by  the  horns,  it 
was  grown  so  pompous  and  furiously  mad.  Well 
have  Congregationalists,  in  general,  followed  his 
advice.  ''  In  deference  to  some  good  men "  (or 
their  prospective  votes),  "the  proposals  were  never 
carried  beyond  the  bounds  of  mere  proposals."  ^  So 
have  fared  the  subsequent  proposals,  having  all 
died  in  their  birth.  The  Connecticut  Consocia- 
tionists  did  not  claim  to  be  strict  Congregation- 
alists in  the  beginning,^  and  have  ever  been  divided 
on.  the  vital  question,  whether  the  consociation  has 
juridical  or  only  advisory  power.* 

^  Page  138.  ^  C.  Mather's  Rat.  Dis.  183,  184.  ^Trumbuirs 
Hist.  Con.  i.  486.    *  Dr.  Stiles's  Con.  Serm.  74—80. 

VETO.  —  See  Pastor,  has  he  a  negative  vote  ? 

VOTERS,  who  are,  in  the  church  ?  —  Robinson, 
in  his  Apology,*  argues  the  privilege  to  all  of  vot- 
ing in  church  judgments ;   "  by  which,"  he  says, 


380  WAR. 

"we  do  not  understand,  as  it  hath  pleased  some 
contumaciously  to  upbraid  us,  to  include  women 
and  children,  but  only  men,  making  account  that 
as  children  by  their  nonage,  so  women  by  their  sex, 
are  debarred  the  use  of  authority  in  the  church." 

^  In  Punchard's  Hist.  348,  349  ;  and  Works,  iii.  43. 

VOTERS,  restriction  of  affected  ecclesiastical 
affairs.  —  In  1631,  the  General  Court  of  Massachu- 
setts "made  an  order  that  for  time  to  come  none 
should  be  admitted  to  the  freedom  of  the  body  poli- 
tic, but  such  as  were  church  members.^  In  1646, 
the  subjects  of  these  restrictions  in  Massachusetts 
and  Plymouth  petitioned  "that  civil  liberty  and 
freedom  be  granted  to  all  English."  In  1657,  the 
disaffected  endeavored  to  get  redress  by  claiming 
their  rights  to  the  Lord's  Supper.^  This  resulted 
in  the  adoption  of  the  Half-way  Covenant,  by  the 
Synod  of  1662.^  In  1664,  the  order  was  repealed ; 
but  "  the  minister  was  to  certify  that  the  candidates 
for  freedom  were  of  orthodox  sentiments,  and  of 
good  lives  and  conversation."  The  bearings 
of  these  restrictions  on  the  efforts  to  establish  the 
Half-way  Covenant  and  the  Church-membership 
of  the  baptized  may  be  learned  from  Trumbull's 
History  of  Connecticut,  and  Wisner's  History  of 
the  Old  South  Church,  Boston.  —  See  Consocia- 
tions, ono^'/i  o/;  Half-way  Covenant. 

»  Hutchinson's  Hist.  Mass.  i.  30.    ^  Wisner's  Hist.  Old  Soutli 
Church,  Boston,  4,  note.    '  lb.  page  5. 

WAR.  —  Burroughs,  in  his  Irenicum,  says :  "  The 


WIDOWS.  881 

apostle  doth  not  here  (James  iv.  1)  condemn  wars 
simply.  This  was  the  error  of  the  old  Manichees, 
raised  up  again  by  some  among  us  (the  Anabap- 
tists). There  can  be  no  reason  given  why  our  civil 
right  to  our  religion  may  not  as  well  be  maintained 
by  the  sword,  as  our  civil  right  to  our  houses  and 
lands.  This  answers  all  the  objections  from  the 
practice  of  the  primitive  Christians :  .  . .  they  never 
had  any  civil  right  to  the  practice  of  their  religion. 
The  wars  meant  in  the  text  are  contentions,  jars, 
divisions  among  Christians."  He  says :  ^  "  Dividing 
terms  are  not  broad  among  the  arniy ;  .  .  .  soldiers 
united  in  love,  and  hating  that  which  is  vile,  are 
exceedingly  strengthened  in  valor.  Ever  since  our 
armies  have  been  united,  God  hath  wonderfully 
blessed  them.  A  rare  instance,  but  still  a  real  one, 
in  which  an  army  can  be  cited  as  a  model  of  a 
collection  of  Christians.  —  See  Resistance. 

^  In  Han.  iii.  116.     ^  lb.  120,  121. 

WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY,  no  ecclesiastical 
authority.  —  Neal,  in  his  History  of  the  Puritans,* 
shows  that  their  confession  never  was  adopted  by 
the  English  Parliament,  nor  did  it  become  the  law 
of  the  land ;  but  was  forthwith  made  the  test  of 
the  kirk  of  Scotland.  Parliament  called  them  to 
sit,^with  the  express  injunction  that  "  this  ordinance 
shall  not  give  them,  nor  shall  they  in  this  assembly 
assume  or  exercise,  any  jurisdiction,  power,  or  autho- 
rity ecclesiastical  whatsoever."  —  See  Savoy  Con- 
fession. 

»Vol.  ii.  41.    2Ib.  i.  458. 


382  WITCHCRAFT. 

WIDOWS,  their  office.  —  Robinson,  in  the  Appen- 
dix to  Mr.  Perkins,*  makes  it  "  to  afford  to  the  sick 
and  impotent  in  body,  not  able  otherwise  to  help 
themselves,  their  cheerful  and  comfortable  help." 
So  the  True  Description  of  the  Visible  Church ;  ^ 
Cambridge  Platform ; '  Cartwright's  Answer  to 
Whitgift*  This  was  obviously  a  very  necessary 
office  in  the  times  of  persecution,  but,  so  far  as  I 
know,  is  now  universally  laid  aside,  as  of  special 
origin  and  institution.  The  True  Description  of 
the  Visible  Church*  says  they  must  be  at  least 
sixty  years  of  age,  &c.  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his 
Divine  Institution  of  Congregational  Churches,^ 
says :  "  And  there  may  be  women's  helps,  called 
deaconesses."  —  See  Neander's  Church  History, 
vol.  i.  sect.  2,  p.  188 ;  Punchard's  View,  85.  Some 
suppose  the  widows  to  have  been  taken  into  the 
number  to  be  provided  for ;  widows  indeed,  having 
none  to  provide  for  them  ;  received,  both  in  charity 
and  to  promote  their  usefulness. 

»In  Punchard's  Hist.  353.  ^jb.  369.  =*  chap.  vii.  sect.  7. 
*Page  191.  *In  Punchard's  Hist.  367;  and  Works,  iii.  429. 
«  Page  62. 

WITCHCRAFT.  —  The  early  New  England 
Congregationalists  are  often  stigmatized  as  having 
been  peculiar  in  their  delusions  concerning  witch- 
craft. But  the  same  delusion  prevailed  all  over  the 
Christian  world.  Scotland,  with  her  semi-infalli- 
ble kirk,  was  even  then  doing  more  work  of  the 
same  kind  than  was  done  in  the  New  England 
colonies.     The  King's  Bench  in  England,  with  Sir 


WITCHCRAFT.  383 

Matthew  Hale  at  the  head,  drove  forward  the  same 
business,  and  employed  a  witch-hunter  by  profes- 
sion/ But,  lo !  in  Essex  county,  Mass.,  it  is  dis- 
covered that  the  supposed  ordeal  for  detecting  the 
guilty  may  be  defective.  Judge  Sewall,  with  tears, 
bewails  the  wrong  he  has  been  superstitiously 
inflicting  on  the  unhappy  accused,  condemned,  and 
executed ;  the  world  are  publicly  informed  of  the 
discovered  error;  and  the  multitude  now  agree  to 
cast  the  obloquy  on  the  first  discoverers  and  forsa- 
kers  of  the  wrong.  And  (O  shame!)  Congrega- 
tionalists,  and  some  of  them  in  high  standing, 
carelessly  perpetuate  the  obloquy,  by  commingling 
their  false  invectives  against  the  first  reformers  on 
this  subject  with  the  truthful  history  of  our  country. 
As  well  might  we  disparage  the  sagacity  of 
Columbus,  because  he  was  once  ignorant  of  the 
existence  of  the  Western  World.  Witchcraft  was 
almost  the  only  subject  upon  which  the  Christian 
world  was  agreed,  till  our  fathers  discovered  their 
own  error  therein,  and  led  the  way  which  has  since 
been  universally  followed.  A  letter  from  T.  Brattle, 
F.R.S.,  Oct.  8,  1692,^  though  expressing  a  disbelief 
in  witchcraft,  attributes  the  matter  to  Satanic  influ- 
ence ;  and  says  it  was  "  proved  a  slander  that  more 
than  forty  men  in  Andover  could  raise  a  witch  as 
quick  as  any  astrologer."  He  expressly  acquits 
Increase  Mather  from  being  in  favor  of  the  prose- 
cutions, and  reckons  him  among  those  who  took 
the  same  ground  with  himself;  being  dissatisfied 
with  the  course  pursued.  Eliot,  in  his  Biographi- 
cal Dictionary,'  art.   Calef,  Robert,  speaks  of  In- 


884  WITCH  CK  AFT. 

crease  and  Cotton  Mather  as  identified  with  a 
defence  of  the  course;  an  insinuation  from  which 
such  testimony  as  the  above  from  Brattle  (an  oppo- 
nent of  the  Mathers')  ought  for  ever  to  free,  —  at 
least  the  father.  J.  Moody  defended  and  aided 
the  accused  in  their  escape,  at  his  own  peril."*  Dr. 
Watts,  in  a  letter  to  Cotton  Mather  in  1719—20,* 
cannot  believe  that  the  spectral  evidence  is  suffi- 
cient for  conviction,  though  he  is  convinced  "  that 
there  is  much  agency  of  the  devil  in  these  affairs, 
and  perhaps  there  were  some  real  witches  too." 
Even  Calef,  one  of  the  earliest  opposers  of  the 
mode  of  testing  witches,  seems  to  have  but  very 
confused  notions  on  the  subject ;  sometimes  seem- 
ingly admitting,  and  anon  denying,  special  pos- 
session. (See  his  work  entitled  Wonders  of  the 
Invisible  World.)  Doubtless,  ministers  were  many 
of  them  equally  confused  in  their  views,  in  those 
practically  fearful  times.  Yet  it  is  worthy  of  note, 
that  the  opposers  of  Mr.  Parris,  one  of  the  greatest 
agents  in  the  tragedies,  represent  his  principles  as 
^'differing  from  the  opinion  of  the  generality  of 
orthodox  ministers  in  the  country."  ^  This  was  in 
1693.  Increase  Mather,  in  his  Cases  of  Con- 
science,^ gives  many  cautions  against  condemning 
on  insufficient  testimony.  He  inveighs  against  the 
trial  by  water,  and  reduces  the  points  of  evidence 
to  tv/o,  viz. :  Voluntary  confession  of  sane  per- 
sons ;  and  two  witnesses  to  the  doing  of  that 
which  none  can  do  but  by  supernatural  power. 
For  a  lucid  view  of  the  Scripture  doctrine  concern- 
ing witchcraft,  see  Kitto's  Cyclopedia  of  Biblical 


WITHDRAWINQ.  385 

Literature.     He  demonstrates  that  it  refers  to  pre- 
tended supernatural  powers. 

»  Pond's  Mather  Family,  110—130.  '  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series 
i.  vol.  V.  61—79.  3  Page  95.  ■•  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  328,  329,  note. 
*  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  v.  202.  **  More  Wonders  of  the 
Invisible  World,  126.     '  Pages  34,  38. 

WITHDRAWING  communion;  the  extent  of  the 
poiver  oJl  churches  respecting  each  other,  —  Cam- 
bridge Platform^  takes  this  ground,  and  asserts 
that  churches  have  no  more  power  over  each  other 
than  one  apostle  had  over  another.  See  Upham's 
Rat.  Dis.  143.  —  See  Churches  discipline  each 
other,  Sfc. ;  Excommunication,  one  church  has  not 
poiver  of,  over  another, 

*  Chap.  xr.  sect.  2. 

WITHDRAWING  from  communion,  what  have 
churches  to  do  ivith  those  ?  —  Brads  haw,  in  his 
English  Puritanism,^  says  :  "  If  .  .  .  offenders  will 
voluntarily  withdraw  from  communion,  the  church 
have  no  further  concern  with  them."  The  Congre- 
gational Manual^  says  of  such:  "  The  church  may 
withdraw  fellowship  from  him,  and  esteem  and  de- 
clare itself  discharged  from  any  further  watch  and 
care  over  him."  MitchelP  holds  the  contrary,  say- 
ing :  "  The  gospel  knows  no  such  rule ;  it  supposes 
no  separation  from  the  church,  but  by  regular  dis- 
mission to  another  church  or  by  excommunication." 
Yet*  he  quotes  approvingly  from  Say  brook  Plat- 
form, that  the  church  may  simply  disown  or  cease 

to  know  him  as  a  member :  he  having  thereby  cut 
33 


386  WITHDRAWING. 

himself  off  from  the  church's  communion,  the 
church  may  justly  esteem  and  declare  itself  dis- 
charged from  any  further  inspection  over  him." 
Owen,  in  his  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,*  uses 
nearly  the  words  last  quoted,  and  says :  "  Some  say 
that  this  is  enough  ; "  and  adds  :  "  It  is  sufficient 
for  those  who  own  no  office-power  in  excommuni- 
cation." Owen  maintains  that  the  church  have 
further  duties  to  do,  which  they  owe  both  to  them- 
selves and  the  offender.  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his 
Divine  Institution  of  Congregational  Churches,^ 
says  of  one  departing  to  non-communion,  or  to 
communion  with  another  church :  "  He  doth  dis- 
franchise and  excommunicate  himself."  He  as- 
serts,^ that,  if  a  member  thus  withdraw,  the  church 
ought  to  declare,  that  he,  being  sinfully  departed 
from  them,  is  no  longer  under  its  watch,  and  is  not 
to  return  till  he  has  given  satisfaction  to  the  church. 
The  Heads  of  Agreement  by  the  United  Congrega- 
tional and  Presbyterian  Ministers  ®  says :  "  It  may 
sometimes  come  to  pass,  that  a  church  member, 
not  otherwise  scandalous,  may  fully  withdraw.  .  .  . 
He  having  cut  himself  off  from  that  church's  com- 
munion, the  church  may  justly  esteem  and  declare 
itself  discharged  from  any  further  inspection  over 
him." 

»In  Neal's  Puritans,  i.  249.  ^  Page  35.  ^  Guide,  117.  '•lb. 
116.  *  Works,  XX.  558.  «  Pages  116,  117.  '  lb.  128.  «  In  Con- 
gregational  Order,  257,  258. 

WITHDRAWING  to  other  churches,  when  deniea 
a  dismission.  —  Watts,  in  his   Terms  of  Commu- 


women's  rights.  387 

nion/  asserts,  that,  if  a  church  refuse  to  dismiss  a 
member  to  another  church,  he  may  withdraw.  — 
See  Affinity  ;  Dismission  ;  Members,  may  a  church 
receive,  without  dismission  ? 

1  Works,  iii.  253. 

WOMEN'S  RIGHTS.— Robinson,  in  his  Reply 
to  Bernard,*  enumerates,  among  their  ecclesiastical 
rights,  making  profession  of  faith  and  confession  of 
sin ;  saying  amen  to  the  church's  prayers ;  singing 
psalms  vocally ;  accusing  a  brother  of  sin  ;  witness- 
ing an  accusation,  or  defending  themselves  being 
accused ;  and,  where  no  man  will,  reproving  the 
church  rather  than  it  should  go  on  in  sin.  He 
holds  them  debarred  from  voting  and  ordinary  pro- 
phesying (i.e.  publicly  expounding  and  exhorting), 
but  not  from  simple  speaking.  Ainsworth,  in  his 
Reply  to  Clyfton,^  says :  "  And  although  woman,  in 
regard  to  her  sex,  may  not  speak  or  teach  in  the 
church,  yet  with  other  women,  and  in  her  private 
family,  she  openeth  her  mouth  in  wisdom,  and  the 
doctrine  of  grace  is  on  her  tongue.  Miriam  was  a 
guide  to  the  women  of  Israel,  and  Priscilla  helped  to 
expound  the  way  of  God  more  perfectly  to  ApoUos." 
Robinson '  advocates  the  same  in  his  Letter  to  the 
Church  in  London.  The  Synod  in  Boston,  in 
1637,  condemned  the  proceeding  of  a  public  meet- 
ing, where  some  sixty  or  more  were  present  weekly ; 
and  one  woman  took  upon  her  the  whole  exercise 
in  a  prophetical  way."*  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  his  Di- 
vine Institution  of  Congregational  Churches,*  says : 
"  Women  may  not  speak  or  exercise  authority  in 


888  WORSHIP. 

the  church."  Eliot,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History 
of  Massachusetts,^  says  Cotton  would  not  consent 
that  his  wife  should  make  an  open  confession  of 
her  faith,  when  she  joined  the  church,  considering 
it  as  against  modesty ;  but  she  was  examined  by 
the  elders.  John  Milton,  in  his  Treatise  on  Chris- 
tian Doctrine,^  after  advocating  the  right  of  every 
brother  to  teach  and  expound  the  gospel,  adds : 
"  Women  are,  however,  enjoined  to  keep  silence  in 
the  churches."  See  Neander's  Church  History,  i. 
104.  —  See  Preach,  who  may  ? 

'  In  Han.  i.  214,  and  Punchard's  Hist.  331 ;  and  Works,  ii. 
215,216.  2  Han.  i.  281.  =*  lb.  450.  "  ^yinthrop's  Journal,  i.  240. 
^  Page  105.    6  In  Hist.  Soc.  Col.  series  i.  vol.  be.  22.    '  Vol.  ii.  204. 

WORSHIP,  instituted^  a  church  may  not  impose 
additions  to.  —  Owen,  in  his  Catechism,^  says :  A 
church  may  not  impose  additions  to  instituted  wor- 
ship. Bradshaw,  in  his  English  Puritanism,*  says : 
"  The  Puritans  hold  it  to  be  high  presumption  to 
institute,  and  bring  into  divine  worship,  such  rites 
and  ceremonies  of  religion  as  are  acknowledged  to 
be  no  parts  of  divine  worship  at  all."  See  also  his 
general  arguments,  proving  that  the  ceremonies 
imposed  upon  the  Puritans  by  the  prelates  were 
unlawful.' 

*  Works,  xix.  490.  *  In  his  Treatise  on  Worsliip  and  Ceremo- 
nies, 36.    3  lb.  61—81. 


BRIEF  NOTICES 


or   SOME    OF   THE 


PRINCIPAL  AUTHORS,  TREATISES,  AND  ASSEMBLIES, 


BEFEERED   TO   IN   THIS   DICTIONABT. 


33* 


ABBREVIATIONS. 


In  the  following  notices,  — 

H.  TJ.   .     .     stands  for    .    •      graduated  at  Harvard  University.* 

Y.  C Yale  College. 

B.  U Brown  University.* 

D.  C Dartmouth  College. 

W.C Williams  College. 

N.H Nassau  Hall. 

(1)  implies  that  the  "work  thus  noted  may  be  found  in  the  — 
Library  of  American  Antiquarian  Society. 

.  Library  of  Brown  University.     . 

.  Library  of  Harvard  University. 

.  Library  of  Boston  Athenaeum. 

.  Library  of  Massachusetts  Historical  Society,  Bost. 

.  New  England  Library,  Old  South  Church,  Boston. 

.  Library  of  the  Theological  Seminary,  Andover. 

.  Commonwealth  Library,  Boston,  State  House. 

.  Library  of  Yale  College. 

.  Connecticut  Hist.  Society's  Library,  Hartford. 

.  Massachusetts  Historical  Society's  Collection. 

.  Historical  Memorials,  by  Hanbury. 

.  History  of  Congregationalism,  by  Punchard. 

.  History  of  the  Puritans  by  Neal. 


(2^ 
(3) 
(4) 
(5) 
(6) 
(7) 
(8) 
(9) 
(10) 
(a) 

(6) 
(0 
id) 


D.  died. 


set.  aged. 


"WTien  several  figures  occur  within  the  same  parenthesis,  —  thus 
(1,  2,  4,  8),  or  (3,  1,  2,  4),  the  first  of  the  series  is  of  the  edition 
quoted  in  this  Dictionary ;  the  rest  may  be  of  another  edition  : 
in  that  case,  the  pages  may  not  correspond  with  the  notes  in 
the  Dictionary. 


The  present  names  of  these  institationa  are  used  in  this  work. 


NOTICES. 


Adams,  Hannah,  a  woman  of  rare  literary  merit  and 
great  worth.  D.  1831,  set.  76.  History  of  New  Eng- 
land, Dedham,  1799  (1,  3,  4,  9). 

At)AMS,  J.  Q,.,  sixth  President  of  the  United  States  ; 
H.  U.  1787.  D.  1848,  aet.  81.  Anniversary  Plymouth 
Oration,  Bost.  1802  (1).  Oration  before  the  Massachu- 
setts Historical  Society  (a). 

Adams,  Samuel,  the  celebrated  revolutionary  politi- 
cian, remarkable  for  his  piety,  patriotism,  and  Puritanism. 
H.  U.  1740.  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  1794 — 1796, 
D.  1803,  aet.  82. 

Adams,  Zabdiel,  a  very  respectable  minister  of  Lu- 
nenburg. H.  U.  1759.  D.  1801,  set.  61.  Treatise  on 
Church  Government,  Bost.  1773,  maintaining  veto  power 
in  ministers  (1). 

-^Eius,  presbyter  of  Sebastia,  flourished  about  A.D. 
385.  He  maintained  that  there  should  be  but  one  order 
of  the  clergy,  and  was  the  leader  of  a  sect  essentially 
Congregational. 

AiNswoRTH,  Henry,  one  of  the  exiles  to  Holland, 
and  teacher  of  the  church  in  Amsterdam,  sustained  by 
Robinson  and  Brewster.  A  great,  learned,  and  good,  but 
imperfect  man.  Arrow  against  Idolatry  (Z>) ;  Answer  to 
Clyfton,  Amst.  1613  (1);  Answer  to  Paget  (J);  Contro- 
versy with  Broughton  {b) ;   Answer  to   Smith,  AmsL 


392  NOTICES. 

1609  (1)  ;  Communioii  of  Saints,  Lond.  1641  ;  Reply  to 
Johnson  (5). 

Alasco,  or  a  Lasco,  John,  a  Polish  nobleman.  Ga- 
thered a  church  of  Polish  refugees  in  London  in  1550. 
Was  in  great  esteem  with  Erasmus  and  Peter  Martyr ; 
was  banished  by  Mary ;  returned  on  the  accession  of 
Elizabeth,  but  could  not  get  his  charter  for  an  Indepen- 
dent church  re-established. 

Allen,  William,  D.D.,  formerly  President  of  Bow- 
doin  College,  now  a  resident  of  Northampton,  Mass. 
American  Biographical  Dictionary,  valuable;  Bost.  1832 
(1,  2,  3,  7,  8,  10). 

Allin,  John,  first  minister  of  Dedham.  A  courteous 
man,  full  of  Christian  love,  bold  against  error,  a  diligent 
student  and  good  scholar.  D.  1671,  set.  71,  having  been 
twenty-four  years  at  Dedham.  Defence  of  Answer  to 
Nine  Positions  (with  T.  Shepard),  Lond.  1648  (1,  6). 

Alltn,  John,  a  highly  respectable  pastor  of  Duxbury. 
Ordained  1788.  Anniversary  Plymouth  Sermon,  Bost. 
1802  (1,  10). 

Ames,  William,  D.D.,  educated  at  Cambridge,  Eng- 
land ;  exiled  to  Holland ;  Professor  of  Divinity  at  the 
University  of  Franeker  ;  removed  to  Rotterdam,  and  was 
co-pastor  with  Hugh  Peters.  D.  1633,  set.  57.  Preface 
to  Bradshaw's  English  Puritanism,  Lond.  1660  (1); 
Fresh  Suit  against  Human  Ceremonies,  Lond.  1633  (1, 
4,  6)  ;  Cases  of  Conscience,  Lond.  1643  (3)  ;  Marrow  of 
Sacred  Divinity  (translation),  Lond.  1642  (3). 

Ames,  William,  jun.,  D.D.,  son  of  the  famous  Pro- 
fessor of  Franeker,  came  to  New  England  when  a  child, 
H.  U.  1645.  Settled  co-pastor  with  his  uncle  in  Wren- 
tham,  England,  1648  ;  afterwards  ejected.  A  very  holy 
and  excellent  man.  D.  1689,  set.  65,  Legislative  Power 
Christ's  Prerogative,  Lond.  1666  (1). 


NOTICES.  393 

• 

Anstvee  of  the  Divines  to  His  Majesty's  Rea- 
sons WHY  he  cannot  Abolish  the  Episcopal 
Government  (Compiler,  d). 

Answer  of  New  England  Elders  to  Nine  Po- 
sitions, Lend.  1643,  a  very  able  work,  usually  ascribed 
to  the  pen  of  John  Davenport,  though  some  have  attri- 
buted it  to  Richard  Mather  (1,  6). 

Appleton,  Nathaniel,  D.D.,  a  distinguished  mini- 
ster of  Cambridge,  Mass.  H.  U.  1712  ;  ordained,  1717. 
D.  1784,  a^t.  90.  Sermon  at  Ordination  of  Missionaries, 
Bost.  1753  (1). 

Backus,  Isaac,  ordained  over  Congregational  Church, 
Middleborough,  1743;  became  a  Baptist,  1756.  D. 
1806,  set.  82.  An  author  of  considerable  merit.  His- 
tory of  New  England,  with  special  reference  to  Baptists, 
Bost.  1777  (1,  2,  3). 

Bacon,  Leonard,  D.D.  Y.  C.  1820  ;  installed  pas- 
tor. First  Church,  New  Haven,  1825.  A  distinguished 
divine,  excelling  both  in  logical  and  forensic  talents. 
Church  Manual,  New  Haven,  1833;  Historical  Dis- 
courses, New  Haven  and  New  York,  1839  ;  exceedingly 
valuable  documents,  from  which  much  more  valuable 
matter  should  have  been  extracted  for  this  work,  had 
they  been  seasonably  possessed. 

Bagshawe,  Edward,  a  respectable  lawyer  of  the 
Middle  Temple  ;  author  of  Arguments  in  Parliament 
against  the  Canons,  for  which  he  was  obliged  to  retire 
into  the  country.  He  appears  to  advantage  in  Hanbury, 
ii.  140 — 147.  Blake  notices  a  minister  of  the  same  name, 
who  was  so  violent,  that  he  was  imprisoned  for  his  non- 
conformity in  1671.     Query ^  Was  it  the  same  individual  ? 

Baillie,  Robert,  one  of  the  Scotch  commissioners 
in  the  Westminster  Assembly  ;  a  man  of  great  talents. 
His  letters  to  Spang,  in  Hanbury,  however,  show  him  not 


394  NOTICES. 

very  tolerant  in  his  religious  views,  invoking  a  Scots 
army,  15,000  strong,  to  enforce  his  arguments.  Still  he 
was,  doubtless,  a  very  amiable  man.  D.  1662.  Author 
of  a  powerful  treatise  against  the  Erastians,  entitled 
Aaron's  Rod  that  Budded,  &c. ;  Dissuasive  from  the 
Errors  of  the  Times,  Lond.  1646  {b). 

Balch,  William,  pastor  of  Second  Church,  Bradford. 
H.  U.  1724  ;  ordained,  1728.  Was  disciplined  with  his 
church  by  a  neighbor-church  in  1743.  Council  censured 
the  complainants.  D.  1792,  set.  87.  Vindication  of 
Second  Church,  Bradford,  Bost.  1746  (1,  3). 

Ball,  John,  an  English  Nonconformist  divine,  yet 
greatly  opposed  to  separation,  John  Robinson  had  a 
controversy  with  him  on  some  points,  on  which  he  held 
Robinson  to  be  too  great  a  Separatist.     D.  1640,  set.  55. 

Banceoft,  Richard,  D.D.  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, first  broached  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  right  of 
Episcopacy.  A  violent  member  of  the  High  Commission 
Court,  covetous  and  cruel.     D.  1610,  set.  66. 

"  Here  lies  his  Grace  in  cold  clay  clad. 
Who  died  for  want  of  what  he  had.'* 

Barrington  (Lord),  John  Shute,  a  celebrated  law- 
yer, a  learned  Puritan,  and  a  peer  of  the  realm.  D. 
1734,  set.  65. 

Barrow,  Isaac,  D.D.,  a  learned  Episcopal  divine  and 
mathematician.  Held  many  professorships  in  the  Univer- 
sity of  Cambridge,  and  became  Master  of  Trinity  College. 
D.  1677,  set.  47.  Treatise  on  the  Pope's  Supremacy,  in 
which  he  admits  the  independency  of  the  primitive 
churches  {b). 

Barrowe,  Henry,  usually  styled  a  Brownist.  Punch- 
ard  asserts  that  he  was  not  one.  He  was  a  lawyer  of 
Gray's  Inn;  was  hanged  with  Greenwood,  in  1793,  for 


NOTICES.  395 

"  nonconformity  to  the  rights  and  ceremonies  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church."  Brief  Discovery  of  a  False  Church,  1590 
(5) ;  Answer  to  Giffard,  1591  (&). 

Bartlett,  William,  minister  of  the  gospel  at  Wap- 
ping.  Hanbury,  in  a  note,  iii.  236,  says  that  he  was 
formerly  of  the  University  of  Oxford.  This  is  all  which, 
with  considerable  effort,  I  have  been  able  to  learn  of 
him  ;  but  his  work  is  a  sufficient  biography  :  where  that 
is  known,  his  fair  fame  will  not  decay.  Model  of  the 
Primitive  Congregational  Way,  1647  (3),  (1,9).  ^ 

Bastwic,  John,  M.D.,  a  physician  of  Colchester. 
Excommunicated,  fined  £1,000,  and  imprisoned  for  wri- 
ting a  book  against  the  Roman  Episcopate,  which  oflfended 
the  English  bishops,  because  it  denied  their  divine  right. 
On  charge  of  writing  other  books  in  prison,  he  was  pil- 
loried and  lost  his  ears,  in  company  with  Prynne  and 
Burton,  in  1636.  A  violent  Presbyterian.  Treatise  on 
Church  Government,  1645  {b). 

Baxter,  Richard,  a  great  and  good  man,  whose  cha- 
racter is  too  well  known  to  require  description,  and  too 
well  established  to  need  panegyric.  He  was  a  Noncon- 
formist, but  agreed  strictly  with  no  sect  of  them  concern- 
ing ecclesiastical  polity.  Ejected  from  Kidderminster  ; 
retired  to  Coventry.  Chaplain  both  to  Cromwell  and 
Charles  II.,  but  agreed  with  neither.  Imprisoned  repeat- 
edly, and  last  by  Jeffries,  for  his  Commentary.  D.  1691, 
set.  76. 

Baylies,  Francis,  a  gentleman  of  political  note  and 
literary  merit.  He  has  recently  deceased.  Has  pub- 
lished a  good  History  of  New  Plymouth  Colony,  Bost. 
1830  (2,  3,  9,  10). 

Baynes,  Paul,  educated  at  Christ's  College,  Cam- 
bridge, of  which  he  became  Fellow  and  Lecturer.  Put 
down,  at  the  instance  of  Bancroft,  for  not  subscribing. 


896  NOTICES. 

A  divine  of  uncommon  learning,  clear  judgment,  ready 
wit,  and  much  communion  with  God  and  his  own  heart, 
but  was  reduced  to  great  poverty  and  want.  D.  1617. 
Diocesan's  Trial,  Lond.  1641  (1,  3). 

Bellaemine,  Robert,  a  celebrated  Jesuit  of  Italy, 
but  did  not  adopt  all  the  tenets  of  the  Jesuits.  His  ad- 
missions and  demonstrations  are  frequently  quoted  to 
sustain  certain  Congregational  principles.  D.  1621, 
set.  79. 

•  Bellamy,  Joseph,  D.D.,  minister  of  Bethlem,  Conn. 
Y.  C.  1735  ;  ordained,  1740.  Was  one  of  the  most  able 
divines  of  the  country.  D.  1790,  aet.  71.  "Works,  New 
York,  1812  (1,  2,  3,  4,  7,  9,  10). 

Bentley,  William,  D.D.,  pastor  of  Second  Church, 
Salem,  Mass.  H.  U.  1777;  ordained,  1783.  D.  1819, 
aet.  81.  Donor  of  a  collection  of  books  to  Meadville 
College,  Penn.,  and  another  to  the  American  Antiquarian 
Society.     History  of  Salem  {a). 

Bernard,  Richard,  rector  of  Batecome,  in  Somerset- 
shire. A  conforming  Puritan  ;  once  well  affected  towards 
Separatists,  but  relapsed,  and  used  much  invective 
against  them.  Separatists'  Schism  about  1608,  answered 
by  Ainsworth  and  Robinson  (Z>,  c). 

Bradbury,  Thomas,  a  facetious  dissenting  minister 
of  Stepney,  and  Fetter  Lane,  near  London.  Some  speak 
of  his  wit  as  consecrated  to  Christ,  while  others  censure 
it  in  no  measured  terms.  He  had  certainly  unbounded 
popularity  with  his  own  people.  D.  1757,  set.  80.  The 
Ass  and  the  Serpent,  Lond.  1712  (1,  2,  3,  4,  5) ;  Law- 
fulness of  Resisting  Tyrants,  Lond.  1714  (1,  3,  4)  ; 
Non-resistance  without  Priestcraft,  Lond.  1715  (1,  3,  4). 

Bradford,  Alden,  H.  U.  1786.  Several  years  a 
clergyman  of  Wiscasset,  Maine  ;  afterward  Secretary  of 
State  of  Massachusetts.      D.   1843.      Anniversary  Ser- 


NOTICES.  397 

mon,  Plymouth,  Bost.  1805  (1,  4,  5,  8,  10) ;  History  of 
Massachusetts,  Bost.  1822  (1,  2,  3,  9,  10). 

Bradford,  William,  second  Governor  of  Plymouth 
Colony,  and  one  of  the  first  settlers  ;  had  only  a  com- 
mon school  education  ;  was  imprisoned  at  eighteen  years 
of  age  for  attempting  to  go  over  into  Holland  with  the 
Puritans  ;  was  among  the  most  daring  of  the  explorers 
for  a  place  of  settlement ;  Governor,  except  five  years, 
from  1621  till  his  death,  1657;  set.  69.  Dialogue  in 
Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims. 

Bradshaw,  William,  educated  at  Emanuel  College  ; 
Fellow  of  Sidney  College  ;  suspended  from  his  ministry 
in  Kent  for  non-subscription  in  1601  ;  Lecturer  of 
Christ's  Church,  London,  but  obliged  to  leave  the  city 
on  account  of  his  Treatise  on  Worship  and  Ceremonies, 
Lond.  1660  (1).  He  also  published  English  Puritan- 
ism, —  clear,  powerful,  and  very  instructive,  Lond.  1642 
(1).     D.  1618,  aet.  47 

Brattle,  Thomas,  an  eminent  merchant  of  Boston. 
H.  U.  1676.  Treasurer  of  the  College  from  1693  to  his 
death,  1713,  set.  55.     Letters  in  (a). 

Brewster,  William,  the  first  and  a  distinguished 
ruling  elder  of  the  church  in  Plymouth ;  was  educated 
at  the  University  of  Cambridge,  England.  He  frequently 
preached,  but  would  never  consent  to  become  pastor.  D. 
1644,  set.  84. 

Bridge,  William,  one  of  the  Westminster  Assembly; 
Fellow  of  Emanuel  College ;  minister  in  Essex  and  Nor- 
wich ;  silenced  by  Bishop  Wren ;  was  excommunicated, 
and  became  pastor  of  the  English  Church  at  Rotterdam ; 
returned  in  1642,  and  became  minister  of  Great  Yar- 
mouth, whence  he  was  ejected  by  the  Bartholomew  Act. 
D.  1670,  set.  70.  Wounded  Conscience  Cured,  Lond. 
1642  (1,  2,  5);  Sermon  to  Volunteers  of  Norwich  and 
34 


898  NOTICES. 

Yarmouth,  Lond.  1642  (1,  2,  5);  Sermon  before  House 
of  Commons,  Lond.  1643  (1);  Vindication  of  Ordinan- 
ces (4). 

Brooke,  Robert,  one  of  the  English  lords  who  sig- 
nally defended  the  Puritans ;  afterward  commander  of 
the  Parliament  army;  killed  in  storming  a  close,  1643. 
Treatise  on  Episcopacy  (&,  d). 

Broughton,  Hugh,  a  learned  but  ill-tempered  di- 
vine ;  minister  of  the  English  Church  at  Middleburg. 
D.  1612,  set.  63.  Controversy  with  Ainsworth  on  Silk 
and  Wool  {h). 

Brown,  Robert,  leader  of  the  sect  of  Brownists.  An 
active,  persevering,  headstrong  reformer ;  advocated  Con- 
gregational principles  in  the  main,  but  Was  a  rigid  Sepa- 
ratist ;  at  last  reverted  back  to  the  Episcopal  Church. 
D.  1630,  a  rector  of  Northamptonshire  ;  in  prison  for  the 
abuse  of  a  magistrate  ;  aet.  80,  boasting  that  he  had  been 
an  inmate  of  thirty- two  prisons. 

BucER,  Martin,  formerly  a  monk,  afterward  a  cele- 
brated reformer ;  twenty  years  Professor  of  Divinity  at 
Strasburg  ;  came  to  England  on  invitation  of  Archbishop 
Cranmer,  and  was  Professor  at  Cambridge :  he  would 
not  wear  a  square  cap  because  his  head  was  not  square. 
D.  1551,  set.  60.  Remarks  on  the  Habits,  and  on  Ec- 
clesiastical Discipline  {d).  His  bones  were  dug  up  and 
burned  in  Mary's  reign. 

Burroughs,  Jeremiah,  one  of  the  Independents  in 
the  Westminster  Assembly  ;  educated  at  Cambridge  ; 
pastor  at  Rotterdam  ;  afterward  preacher,  at  Stepney 
and  Cripplegate,  to  two  of  the  largest  churches  about 
London.  D.  1646,  set.  47.  Glorious  Name  of  the  Lord 
of  Hosts,  Lond.  1643(1);  Answer  to  Feme,  Lond.  1643; 
Irenicum  (Z>). 

Bueton,  Henry,  B.D.,  Clerk  of  the  Closet  to  Prince 


NOTICES.  399 

Henry  and  Charles  I. ;  imprisoned,  fined,  pilloried,  and 
cropped,  with  Prynne  and  Bastwick,  for  his  sermons 
against  Episcopacy.  He  embraced  the  Independent 
views.  D.  1848,  a^t.  69.  Answer  to  Prynne's  Twelve 
Considerable  Questions,  Lend.  1644  (1,  b).  A  Modest 
Answer  to  Prynne's  Full  Reply  to  Certain  Observations 
on  the  Twelve  Considerable  Questions,  Lond.  1645. 

Byles,  Mather,  D.D.,  H.  U.  1725;  ordained  iBrst 
pastor  of  Hollis-street  Church,  Boston,  1733.  D.  1788, 
set.  82. 

Calef,  Robert,  a  merchant  of  Boston ;  author  of  one 
of  the  earliest  treatises  against  the  prevalent  notions  con- 
cerning witchcraft,  about  the  beginning  of  the  last  centu- 
ry. More  Wonders  of  the  Invisible  World,  Salem,  1796 
(1.4). 

Callender,  John,  an  eminent  Baptist  minister  of 
Newport,  R.  I.;  H.  U.  1723.  D.  1748,  aet.  41.  Histo- 
rical Discourse  concerning  Rhode  Island,  Bost.  1739  (1, 
2,  3,  5,  9,  10). 

Cambridge  Platform,  the  Rules  of  Church  Order 
and  Discipline  adopted  by  the  Synod  at  Cambridge,  1648, 
as  pointing  the  churches  to  the  Scripture  directions,  which 
are  the  only  authority  acknowledged  by  Congregational- 
ists,  Bost.  1808  (1,  el  ah). 

Canne,  Johx,  a  distinguished  Brownistical  Baptist ; 
pastor  of  the  Brownist  Church  at  Amsterdam  ;  author  of 
valuable  Notes  on  the  Bible. 

Cartwright,  Thomas,  one  of  the  chief  of  the  Puri- 
tans ;  Fellow  of  Trinity  College  ;  one  of  the  most  learned 
and  acute  disputants  of  the  age.  D.  1603,  set.  68.  Re- 
ply to  Whitgift  (2,  4,  5,  6). 

Charles  I.,  King  ;  Answer  to  the  Divines  attending 
his  Majesty's  Parliament,  concerning  Abolishing  Episco- 
pacy, Lond.  1648.     (The  Compiler,  d.) 


400  NOTICES. 

Chatjncy,  Charles,  D.D.,  educated  at  Westminster 
and  Cambridge  ;  minister  of  Ware  ;  prosecuted  by  Laud 
before  the  High  Commission  for  preaching  against  the 
Book  of  Sports  ;  recanted,  but  repented  his  recantation, 
and  came  to  New  England  in  1638  ;  was  sixteen  years 
pastor  of  the  church  in  Scituate,  and  seventeen  years  Pre- 
sident of  Harvard  College  ;  very  learned  and  very  indus- 
trious,—  always  rose  at  four  o'clock.  D.  1671,  aet.  82. 
Anti-synodalia  (4,  5). 

Chauncy,  Charles,  D.D.,  great-grandson  of  the  Pre- 
sident;  H.  U.  "1721  ;  ordained  colleague  with  Mr.  Fox- 
croft  of  the  First  Church,  Boston,  1727;  figured  in  the 
Episcopal  controversy  about  his  Dudlean  Lecture  ;  wrote 
and  published  much  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  of  universal 
restoration ;  received  the  first  diploma  from  Edinburgh 
ever  given  to  an  American  divine.  D.  1787,  set.  82, 
Dudlean  Lecture,  Bost.  1762  (1,  4,  5,  9). 

Chauncy,  Isaac,  son  of  Pres.  Charles;  H.  U.  1651; 
minister  of  a  Dissenting  church  in  London ;  Dr.  Watts 
became  his  colleague  in  1698.  Chalmers  quotes  Calamy : 
"  He  so  tormented  his  hearers  with  declamations  on 
church  government  that  they  left  him."  If  they  were 
episcopally  inclined,  they  doubtless  were  "  tormented " 
by  his  lucid  demonstrations ;  nor  could  they  have  been 
much  relieved  under  the  castigations  of  his  successor. 
Divine  Institution  of  Congregational  Churches,  Lond. 
1697  (1);  Gospel  Order,  Lond.  1690  (1,  2). 

Chrysostom,  John,  Bishop  of  Constantinople ;  one 
of  the  most  illustrious  of  the  fathers  ;  attributed  the 
power  of  electing  and  deposing  pastors  to  the  people. 
D.  407,  set.  53. 

Clemens  Romantjs,  a  companion  of  Paul ;  Bishop 
(i.e.  pastor)  of  Rome.  D.  100.  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians, Lond.  1647  (1,  2,  7). 


NOTICES.  401 

Cleveland,  John,  minister  of  Ipswich  ;  Y.  C,  1745; 
ordained,  1747.  D.  1799,  aet.  79.  Narrative  of  the 
Fourth  Church,  Ipswich,  Bost.  1767  (1). 

Coleman,  Benjamin,  D.D.  ;  H.  U.  1692;  ordained 
in  London  for  the  new  church  in  Brattle-street,  1699, 
which  led  Dr.  Mather  to  call  the  church  a  "  Presbyterian 
brat;"  elected  President  of  Harvard  College,  1724.  D. 
1747,  £et.  73. 

Coleman,  Lyman;  Y.  C.  1817;  ordained  pastor  of 
the  Congregational  Church,  Belchertown,  1825.  A  dis- 
tinguished scholar.     Primitive  Church,  Bost.  1844. 

Concord,  Result  of  Council  in  1743  (1). 

Congregationalism  as  contained  in  the  Scrip- 
tures AND  explained  BY  THE  Platform,  an  anony- 
mous pamphlet  of  considerable  merit,  Bost.  1794  (1,  4). 

Congregational  Manual,  the  work  of  a  sub-com- 
mittee of  ministers,  of  which  the  venerable  Dr.  L.  Woods 
was  chairman.  The  committee  was  chosen  at  a  meeting 
informally  called  in  Boston,  1844;  the  sub-committee 
first  sent  an  "  Unfinished  Report "  to  the  several  asso- 
ciations, where  it  was  variously  received.  The  Manual 
is  the  mature  result  of  the  labors  of  that  sub-committee, 
published  on  their  own  responsibility  in  1846.  It  seems 
to  advocate  juridical  power  in  councils. 

Congregational  Order,  such  a  treatise  as  the  name 
announces,  by  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut, 
Middletown,  1843. 

Congregational  Union  of  England  and  Wales, 
such  an  association  of  Congregational  ministers  as  its 
name  imports,  acting  also  as  an  efficient  publishing  board. 
Declaration  of  Faith ;  Church  Order  and  Discipline, 
Lond.  1833  {b). 

Convention   op   Congregational  Ministers    in 
Massachusetts  ;  an  assembly,  meeting  annually  on  the 
31* 


402  NOTICES. 

last  Wednesday  in  May.  It  is  now  conducted  mainly  as 
a  charitable  association  for  the  relief  of  the  indigent 
widows  of  deceased  clergymen.  Many'  attempts  have 
been  made  to  induce  it  to  do  ecclesiastical  work ;  but 
they  have  usually  been  failures. 

Cook,  John,  Cromwell's  principal  Secretary ;  exe- 
cuted, 1660.  What  the  Independents  would  Have,  Lond. 
1647  {h)  ;  Monarchy  no  Creature  of  God,  Waterford, 
1652  {b). 

Cooper,  Samuel,  D.D.  ;  H.  U.  1743.  Ordair^ed  suc- 
cessor of  his  father  in  Brattle-street,  Boston,  1746 ; 
chosen  President  of  Harvard  College,  1774.  Fellow  of 
the  American  Academy  of  Arts  and  Sciences,  and  first 
Vice-President  of  the  Society.     D.  1783,  set.  58. 

Cooper,  William,  father  of  the  preceding.  H.  U. 
1712  ;  ordained  colleague  with  Dr.  Coleman,  1716. 
Chosen  President  of  Harvard  College,  1737,  but  declined. 
His  hearers,  instead  of  admiring  and  praising  his  ser- 
mons, went  home  silent  as  the  grave.     D.  1743,  set.  49. 

Corbet,  -John,  an  eminent  divine,  graduated  at  Mag- 
dalen College,  1639;  rector  of  Bramshot  in  Hampshire, 
and  ejected  in  1662.  Baxter  preached  his  funeral  ser- 
mon, and  expressed  a  high  opinion  of  his  learning,  piety, 
and  humility.  Had  a  considerable  share  in  compiling 
the  first  volume  of  Rushworth's  Historical  Collections ; 
Principles  and  Practices  of  Several  Nonconformists, 
Lond.  1682  (1). 

Cotton,  John,  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  a  great  lin- 
guist and  scholar ;  minister  of  Boston,  England.  Fled 
from  the  High  Commission  Court,  and  became  teacher  of 
the  church  in  Boston,  New  England.  His  controversy 
with  Roger  Williams  has  been  much  misrepresented. 
Though  his  principles  of  toleration  did  not  come  up  to 
our  standard,  yet  he  was  very  far  in  advance  of  his  age. 


NOTICES.  408 

Because  he  was  a  very  great  man,  his  errors  and  incon- 
sistencies appear  the  more  conspicuous.  No  man  of  any 
age  ever  swayed  greater  influence  in  Massachusetts,  save 
during  the  Hutchinsonian  Controversy.  His  waning 
then  shows  that  our  fathers  were  only  influenced  by  his 
reasons,  not  controlled  by  his  dictation.  D.  1652,  set. 
67.  Bloody  Tenet  Washed,  Lond.  1647  (1,  2,  3,  6); 
Reply  to  Williams,  Lond.  1647  (1,  2,  5,  6)  ;  Keys  of 
the  Kingdom,  Bost.  1843,  Lond.  1644  (1,  2);  Way 
of  the  Churches,  Lond.  1645  (1)  ;  Way  of  the  Churches 
Cleared,  Lond.  1647  (1,  3,  5);  Holiness  of  Church 
Members,  Lond.  1650  (1,  2,  3,  5,  6). 

Cranmer,  Thomas,  D.D.,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
a  celebrated  reformer.  At  first,  superstitious  and  perse- 
cuting, but  continually  growing  more  tolerant  and  repub- 
lican.    One  of  the  martyrs  of  Mary's  reign,  1555,  set.  67. 

Creeds,  Seasonable  Thoughts  on,  a  pamphlet  con- 
taining very  much  sound  and  some  false  logic,  attributed 
to  Hon.  John  Lowell.  It  gives  the  Unitarian  view  of 
the  subject?     Bost.  1813  (1,  3,  5). 

Cromwell,  Oliver  (Protector),  than  whom  no  man 
has  been  more  abused.  To  no  individual  does  England 
owe  so  much  for  her  freedom  and  her  grandeur ;  yet, 
through  the  restrictions  and  corruptions  of  the  press  after 
his  decease,  he  was  "  damned  to  everlasting  fame  ;"  but, 
by  the  labors  of  Carlyle,  Merle  D'Aubigne,  and  others, 
he  now  rises  to  a  glorious  immortality.     D.  1658,  set.  59. 

Cyprian,  Thascius  Cjelius,  one  of  the  principal 
Fathers.     Beheaded  at  Carthage,  258. 

Davenport,  John,  B.D.,  educated  at  Brazenose  Col- 
lege, Oxford,  Vicar  of  St.  Stephen's,  Coleman-street, 
London.  Preached  and  visited  constantly  in  London 
during  the  plague  ;  fled  to  Holland  from  the  persecution 
of  Laud ;   had  a  controversy   with   the   Dutch   divines 


404  NOTICES. 

about  baptizing  the  infants  of  those  not  professing  expe- 
rimental religion  ;  came  to  Boston  1637,  and  sat  with  the 
Synod  at  Cambridge  ;  declined  an  invitation  to  be  one 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly  ;  principal  founder  of  the 
colony  of  New  Haven  ;  was  threatened  with  royal  ven- 
geance for  concealing  the  regicides,  preaching  to  the 
people  from  Isa.  xvi.  3,  4;  came  to  Boston  in  1657, 
without  a  dismission  from  New  Haven,  being  most  deeply 
interested  against  the  Half-way  Covenant :  this  caused 
the  organization  of  a  new  church.  D.  1770,  set.  73. 
Apologetical  Reply  (6)  ;  Power  of  Congregational 
Churches,  Lond.  1672  (1,  3,  6) ;  Royal  Edict  for  Military 
Exercises,  Lond.  1629  (1). 

Declaration  of  Ecclesiastical  Discipline,  a 
work  published  anonymously  (of  necessity)  in  1574.  It 
is  a  powerful  treatise,  and  was  probably  from  the  pen  of 
Udall,  though  the  histories  do  not  give  exactly  this  title 
to  Udall's  work  (6). 

Denison,  Daniel,  Maj.-Gen.,  a  very  influential  inha- 
bitant of  Ipswich.  D,.  1682.  Irenicon,  or  Salve  for 
New  England's  Sore  (1). 

Dorchester,  Votes  of  Church  and  Result  of  Council 
in,  1773  (1,  4)  ;  Remarks  on  Result  of  Council  in,  Bost. 
1774  (1,  5). 

Dunster,  Henry,  first  President  of  Harvard  College, 
from  1640  to  1654;  resigned  on  account  of  his  opposi- 
tion to  infant-baptism.  The  ministers  and  magistrates 
were  anxious  for  his  continuance,  if  he  could  be  persuaded 
not  to  propagate  his  peculiarity  ;  but  he  was  too  consci- 
entious to  compromise.  Revised  the  New  England 
Version  of  the  Psalms.  D.  1657,  in  perfect  harmony 
with,  and  bequeathing  legacies  to,  those  who  removed 
him  from  the  College. 

DwiGHT,    Timothy,    D.D.,   LL.D.  ;     Y.  C.   1769. 


NOTICES.  405 

Taught  Grammar  School  two  years  ;  was  tutor  six  years, 
farmer  five  years.  Ordained  at  Greenfield,  Conn.,  1783. 
President  of  Yale  College,  1795.  D.  1817,  set.  64. 
Works,  in  4  and  5  vols.  (9,  10). 

Eaton,  Samuel,  one  of  the  first  settlers  of  New  Ha- 
ven, Conn,,  afterwards  returned  and  was  teacher  of  a 
church  in  Dukinfield,  in  Cheshire.  D.  1665.  Defence 
of  Sundry  Positions  and  Scriptures  said  to  Justify  the 
Congregational  Way  (with  T.  Taylor),  Lond.  1645  (1,3). 

EcKLEY,  Joseph,  D.D.  ;  N.  H.  1772.  Ordained 
minister  of  the  Old  South  Church,  Boston,  1719.  A 
Semi-arian,  but  held  all  the  other  points  of  the  Orthodox 
faith.  D.  1811,  set.  60.  Artillery  Election  Sermon, 
Bost.  1792  (1,  10) ;  Dudlean  Lecture,  Bost.  1806  (1). 

Edwakds,  Jonathan  ;  Y.  C.  1720.  Ordained, 
Northampton,  1727  ;  dismissed,  1750.  President  of 
Princeton  College,  N.  J.,  1758,  and  died  a  few  months 
afterwards,  oet.  54.  Probably  the  first  of  American  di- 
vines. Treatise  on  Full  Communion,  Bost.  1749  (1,4, 
5,  9,  10). 

Eliot,  John,  D.D. ;  H.  U.  1772.  Ordained  pastor 
of  New  North  Church,  Boston,  1779.  Contributed  much 
to  the  historical  learning  of  our  country.  D.  1813,  set. 
58.     Biographical  Dictionary  (1,  2,  3,  7,  10). 

Emekson,  William  ;  H.  U.  1787.  Ordained  pastor 
of  Church  in  Harvard,  1792.  Installed,  First  Church, 
Boston,  1799.  D.  1811,  set.  42.  Piety  and  Arms,  Ar- 
tillery Election  Sermon,  Bost.  1799  (1). 

Emmons,  Nathanael,  D.D. ;  Y.  C.  1767.  Ordained, 
1773,  pastor  of  Church  in  Fr^^klin  (then  the  Second 
Church  in  Wrentham).  D.  1840,  aet.  95.  Thus  he  was 
sixty-three  years  in  the  pastoral  oflice,  and  has  a  name  as 
a  writer  and  a  theologian  that  will  never  perish.  Works, 
in  7  vols.  Bost.  1842. 


406  NOTICES. 

Endicot,  John,  sixteen  years  Governor  of  Massachu- 
setts. Came  to  Salem  in  1628,  and  is  styled  Governor 
of  Naumkeake  settlement.  He  was  ardent,  and  some- 
times violent :  cut  the  cross  out  of  the  king's  colors,  after 
"Williams  had  preached  against  that  symbol.  D.  1665, 
aet,  75. 

EuKiNG,  William.  Hanbury  says  that  we  know  no 
more  of  him  than  he  tells  us  in  the  preface  to  his  work, 
viz.  that  he  was  not  brought  up  among  the  muses,  but 
the  mariners.  Robinson  speaks  of  his  assistance  with 
respect,  in  Han.  i.  53,  Answer  to  Drake's  Ten  Counter 
Demands,  1619  (5). 

EusEBius,  Pamphilius,  styled  the  Father  of  Eccle- 
siastical History.     D.  340.     Ecclesiastical  History. 

Felt,  Joseph  B.,  formerly  pastor  of  Congregational 
Church  in  Sharon  and  in  Hamilton;  now  a  learned  and 
laborious  antiquarian  ;  Librarian  of  the  Massachusetts 
Historical  Society.  Annals  of  Salem,  Salem,  1827  (1,  3, 
4,5,8). 

Fekne,  Henry,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Chester,  son  of  Sir 
John,  Fellow  of  Trinity  College.  D.  1661,  «t.  59.  Re- 
solving of  Conscience  ;  Conscience  Satisfied  (Z>) ;  Tract 
against  the  Lawfulness  of  Subjects  to  take  up  Arms  in 
any  case  whatever,  triumphantly  answered  by  William 
Bridge  (1)  and  Jer.  Burroughs  (1). 

Fish,  Elisha,  minister  of  Upton,  Mass.  H.  U.  1750; 
ordained,  1751.  D.  1795.  An  acute  reasoner  and  firm 
patriot.     Art  of  War  Useful  and  Necessary,  Bost.  1774 

FiTCHBURG,  Facts  and  Documents  concerning 
AN  Ecclesiastical  Controversy  in  ;  doubtless  from 
the  pen  of  Dr.  Samuel  Worcester,  Bost.  1802  (1)-;  Com- 
ments on  the  same,  Wor.  1804  (1). 

FoxcROFT,  Thomas,  H.  U.  1714.    Ordained  colleague 


NOTICES.  40T 

with  Mr.  Wadsworth,  1717.  Dr.  Chauncy  was  settled 
as  his  colleague,  1727.  Polite,  eloquent,  and  universally 
admired ;  a  very  devout  and  edifying  preacher ;  author 
of  numerous  valuable  treatises.  D.  1769,  set.  72.  Ser- 
mon at  his  own  Ordination,  Bost.  1718  (1,  2,  3,  4,  5, 
10);  Sermon  Preparatory  to  the  Choice  of  a  Minister, 
Bost.  1727  (1,  10);  Century  Sermon  on  the  Beginning 
of  New  England,  Bost.  1730  (1,  4,  5,  6,  7);  Sermon  at 
Ordination  of  a  Deacon,  Bost.  1731  (1,  2,  3,  5,  6). 

Frankfort,  Troubles  in,  1575  (6). 

Fuller,  Andrew,  an  eminent  English  Baptist  divine; 
a  very  lucid,  powerful,  and  valuable  writer.  D.  1815, 
2Bt.  61.     Works,  Bost.  1833  (2,  7,  9,  10). 

Fuller,  Samuel,  a  physician  of  Plymouth,  and  one 
of  the  first  settlers  ;  deacon  in  the  church  with  Gov.  Car- 
ver. Successfully  showed  Governors  Endicot  and  Brad- 
ford, and  the  churches  of  Plymouth  and  Salem,  that  they 
were  agreed  on  the  subject  of  church  government  and 
discipline ;  whereas,  from  the  misrepresentations,  each 
had  been  jealous  of  the  other. 

Fuller,  Thomas,  D.D.,  an  eminent  English  historian 
and  divine.  D.  1661,  set.  55.  Church  History  of  Bri- 
tain, 1656. 

Genevan  Disputations.  Theses  on  various  Points 
of  Doctrine  and  Discipline  Disputed  and  Maintained  by 
Select  Scholars  at  Geneva,  before  Beza  and  Faius  (trans- 
lation), Edinb.  1591  (Compiler). 

GiEFARD,  George,  a  conforming  Puritan  of  the  six- 
teenth century,  minister  of  Maiden :  figured  largely  in 
the  controversy  with  Greenwood  and  Barrowe  (h). 

Goodwin,  Thomas,  D.D.,  educated  at  Catherine  Hall, 
Cambridge;  left  in  1639,  being  dissatisfied  with  confor- 
mity, and  went  to  Holland ;  returned  at  the  sitting  of 
the  Long  Parliament,  and  was  the  master-spirit  among 


408  NOTICES. 

the  Independents  in  the  Westminster  Assembly ;  Presi- 
dent of  Magdalen  College,  which  he  left  at  the  Restora- 
tion; and  preached  in  London  till  his  death,  1679-80, 
set.  79.  His  Works  are  published  in  five  large  folios ; 
half  of  vol.  iv.  is  on  Church  Government,  Lond.  1697 
(2,  9). 

Gospel  Order  Revived  ;  an  anonymous  publication 
in  answer  to  Increase  Mather's  Gospel  Order.  It  is 
levelled  chiefly  against  requiring  experimental  religion 
in  candidates  for  church  membership ;  probably  from 
the  pen  of  Mr.  Stoddard,  of  Northampton.  Bost.  1700 
(1,5). 

Gkeenhill,  William,  a  distinguished  member  of 
the  Westminster  and  the  Savoy  Assemblies.  He  acted 
in  concert  with  the  Independents. 

Greenwood,  John,  a  university  scholar ;  took  his 
first  degree,  1580;  hanged  at  Tyburn,  1593,  for  "non- 
conformity to  the  rights  and  ceremonies  of  the  English 
Church."  A  godly,  devoted  minister  of  Christ.  Refu- 
tation of  GifFard  {h,  c). 

Hall,  Edwin,  D.D.,  pastor  of  the  Congregational 
Church,  Norwalk,  Conn.  Puritans  and  their  Principles, 
N.Y.,  1846,  a  work  of  unusual  worth. 

Hall,  Joseph,,  a  learned  Bishop  of  Norwich.  D. 
1656,  set.  82.  John  Robinson  had  a  controversy  with 
him  on  Church  Government  {h,  c). 

Hall,  Robert,  a  very  eminent  Open-communion 
Baptist.  His  writings  and  his  spirit  are  universally  ad- 
mired, even  by  those  who  do  not  adopt  them ;  educated 
at  Aberdeen;  ordained  1780;  declined  the  title  D.D. 
D.  1831,  set.  67.     Works,  in  3  vols.  8vo  (9,  10). 

Hampshire  Narrative,  a  controversial  work  con- 
cerning the  ordination  of  Mr.  Breck  at  Springfield,  Bost. 
1736  (1) ;  Answer  to  the  same,  attributed  to  the  pen  of 


NOTICES.  409 

Dr.  Cooper,  of  Boston,  1736  (1,  4);    Rejoinder,  Bost. 
1737(1). 

Hanbury,  Benjamin,  deacon  of  tbie  First  Congrega- 
tional Church,  London.  Historical  Memorials,  Lond. 
1839,  for  the  Congregational  Union  of  England  and 
"Wales ;  —  an  invaluable  digest  of  the  works  of  the  old 
Puritans,  in  3  vols.  8vo,  compiled  with  great  care,  but 
wants  distinctness  of  typographical  arrangement  (9). 

Hakris,  Thaddeus  Mason,  D.D.,  a  distinguished 
and  very  learned  Unitarian  minister,  of  Dorchester, 
Mass.;  H.  U.  1787.  D.  1842,  set.  74.  Sermon  on 
Covenant  Engagements,  Bost.  1801  (1,  5). 

Hart,  William,  minister  of  Saybrook,  Conn. ;  Y.  C. 
1732.  D.  1784.  Remarks  on  Mr.  Dana's  Ordination, 
New  Haven,  1759  (1,  4,  5). 

Haven,  Samuel,  Hon.,  son  and  grandson  of  ministers 
of  Dedham ;  Judge  of  County  Court ;  a  professed  Swe- 
denborgian.  Proceedings  of  the  First  Church  and  Parish 
of  Dedhani,  Cambridge,  1819  (1,  2). 

Hawes,  Joel,  D.D.,  minister,  Hartford,  Conn. ;  B.  U. 
1813  ;  was  soon  ordained  at  Hartford,  where  he  remains, 
one  of  the  distinguished  ministers  of  the  country.  Tri- 
bute to  the  Pilgrims,  Hart.  1830  (2). 

Heads  of  Agreement  between  Congregational  and 
Presbyterian  Ministers  in  London,  A.  D.  1690;  —  a 
kind  of  confession  of  faith,  embodying  the  general  points 
on  which  the  denominations  are  agreed.  They  were 
adopted  by  the  Saybrook  Convention  as  a  part  of  their 
Platform.  They  may  be  seen  in  Congregational  Order, 
Upham's  Ratio  Disciplinae,  et  al. 

Hemmenway,  Moses,  D.D.,  minister  of  Wells,  Me. ; 
H.  U.  1755;    ordained,  1759.      D.  1811,  set.  84 ;  —  a 
learned  theologian.     Controversy  with  Dr.  Emmons  on 
the  Sacraments,  Bost.  1794  (1). 
85 


410  NOTICES. 

Henry,  Matthew,  a  learned  divine  and  noted  com- 
mentator. D.  1714,  set.  52.  Defence  of  his  Enquiry 
into  the  Nature  of  Schism, -Lond.  1692  (1). 

HiGGiNSON,  Francis,  first  minister  of  Salem;  edu- 
cated at  Emanuel  College  in  Cambridge ;  became  minis- 
ter of  Leicester ;  fled  from  the  High  Commission  Court, 
and  came  to  New  England,  1629.  D.  1630;  —  a  truly 
great,  learned,  and  good  man.  Confession  of  Faith  for 
the  Church  in  Salem  (5). 

HiGGiNSON,  John,  son  of  the  preceding;  .was  assist- 
ant preacher  some  fifteen  years  at  Guilford,  Conn.,  and 
ordained  at  Salem  by  lay  brethren  (as  his  father  had  been 
before  him),  1660  ;  one  of  the  most  popular  and  influen- 
tial preachers  in  the  country.  D.  1708,  set.  93.  Attes- 
tation (with  William  Hubbard),  in  Appendix  to  Cam- 
bridge Platform. 

High  Church  Politics,  a  work  setting  forth  some 
of  the  glaring  pretensions  of  high  churchmen,  Lond. 
1792(3,1,7). 

Historical  Society  of  Massachusetts,  instituted 
1791 ;  has  accomplished  much  for  the  advancement  of 
historical  knowledge ;  has  published  three  series  of  ten 
volumes  each,  consisting  of  rare  treatises,  chiefly  on  the 
early  history  of  New  England.  The  Society  has  a  fine 
library  over  the  Savings'  Bank,  Boston. 

Holmes,  Ariel,  D.D.,  LL.D. ;  Y.  C.  1783  ;  ordained 
at  Midway,  Georgia,  1785 ;  installed  at  Cambridge, 
Mass.,  1792;  dismissed,  1832.  D.  1837,  set.  74.  Was 
son-in-law  of  President  Stiles.  One  of  the  very  best  of 
historians,  and  a  great  patron  of  historical  learning. 
Dudlean  Lecture,  Camb.  1810  (1);  Anniversary  Ply- 
mouth Sermon,  Camb.  1806;  Second  Century  Sermon, 
Camb.  1821  (1,  3,  4);  American  Annals,  Camb.  1805 
and  1829  (1,  3,  4,  5,  7,  8,  9,  10). 


NOTICES.  ^  411 

Holt,  John  (Lord  Chief  Justice),  first  a  lawyer  of 
Gray's  Inn  ;  a  great  and  upright  judge.    D.  1709,  £et.  67. 

HooKE,  William  ;  Oxford,  1620  ;  Vicar  of  Axmouth, 
in  Devonshire;  fled  for  nonconformity,  and  was  first 
pastor  of  Taunton ;  afterward  colleague  with  J.  Daven- 
port, in  New  Haven.  Returned  to  England,  and  was 
chaplain  to  Oliver  Cromwell,  his  near  kinsman.  His 
wife  was  sister  to  Judge  Whalley.     D.  1678,  set.  77. 

Hooker,  Richard  (called  "The  Judicious"),  edu- 
cated at  Corpus  Christi,  Oxford,  where  he  was  a  Fellow ; 
took  orders,  1581 ;  Lecturer  of  the  Temple,  1584,  where 
he  came  in  uncomfortable  contact  with  Travers ;  became 
rector  of  Kent,  1595.  D.  1600,  set.  46.  Ecclesiastical 
Polity,  —  a  work  in  high  repute  with  Episcopalians. 

Hooker,  Thomas,  educated  at  Emanuel  College,  Cam- 
bridge; Lecturer  at  Chelmsford,  1626;  silenced  for  non- 
conformity, 1630;  fled  to  Holland,  and  was  assistant  to 
Dr.  Ames ;  came  to  New  England,  and  had  lay  ordina- 
tion at  Cambridge,  1633;  removed  to  Hartford,  1636; 
the  most  influential  man  in  the  colony  of  Connecticut. 
D.  1647,  ast.  61.  Survey  of  Church  Discipline,  Lond. 
1648.'-  His  corrected  copy  was  lost  at  sea,  and  his  first 
draft  was  sent  over  and  published  after  his  death.  This 
work,  with  many  blemishes,  shows  great  research,  and 
probably  the  corrected  copy  was  an  unequalled  produc- 
tion (1,  5,  6,  9,  10). 

Hopkins,  Samuel,  D.D.,  an  eminent  theologian  from 
whom  the  Hopkinsians  derive  their  name;  Y.  C.  1741 ; 
ordained,  Great  Barrington,  1743;  installed  at  Newport, 

*  On  page  121,  note,  it  is  stated  that  some  authors  ascribe  the  fourth 
part  of  this  work  to  J.  Cotton.  At  the  suggestion  of  Rev.  E.  Hooker, 
D.D.,  I  have  examined  the  subject  so  as  to  be  fully  convinced  that  the 
whole  work  is  Hooker's.  See  Dr.  Hooker's  Life  of  T.  Hooker,  pages 
280,  281. 


412  ^  NOTICES. 

R.I.  1770.  D.  1803,  ^t.  82.  System  of  Divinity,  2 
vols.  Bost.  1811. 

Howe,  John,  educated  at  Cambridge ;  Cromwell's 
domestic  chaplain,  and  minister  at  Torrington  and  Sil- 
ver-street, London ;  was  silenced  by  the  act  of  uniform- 
ity. D.  1705,  aet.  74.  He  possessed  talents  of  the 
highest  order,  with  unfeigned  and  exalted  piety.  Dr. 
Emmons  styled  him  the  very  best  English  divine.  His 
writings  most  felicitously  combine  wit  and  dignity. 
Works,  N.  Y.  1835. 

HuBBAKD,  William;  H.  U.  1642,  in  the  first  class; 
an  eminent  preacher  of  Ipswich.  He  was  for  more  strin- 
gency of  the  civil  law  in  enforcing  religion  than  most  of 
his  brethren.  D.  1704,  set.  83.  History  of  Massachu- 
setts (belonging  to  all  the  town-libraries  in  the  State) : 
it  borrows  very  largely  from  the  third  volume  of  Win- 
throp's  manuscripts,  without  giving  credit,  for  which  he 
has  been  much  censured,  probably  without  good  reason, 
as  the  work  was  not  published  till  after  his  death.  It  is 
unfair  to  blame  the  author  for  what  his  survivors  did  not 
do.  Attestation  (with  John  Higginson),  in  Cambridge 
Platform. 

Hume,  Dayid,  a  celebrated  English  writer  of  great 
power.  He  was  an  atheist  and  sceptic,  but  sustained  an 
unblemished  personal  character.  D.  1776,  set.  65.  His- 
tory of  England. 

Hutchinson,  Thomas,  LL.D.  ;  Governor  of  the 
Province  of  Massachusetts  from  1771  to  1774;  H.  U. 
1727.  In  early  life  was  a  popular  magistrate,  but  by  his 
Tory  preferences  became  very  obnoxious  as  the  crisis  of 
the  Revolution  approached.  D.  1780,  aet.  69.  History 
of  Massachusetts,  Salem,  1795  (1,  2,  3,  8,  9,  10);  Mas- 
sachusetts Collection  of  State  Papers,  Bost.  1769  (1,  2, 
3) :  both  are  valuable  productions. 


NOTICES.  413 

Independents  in  the  Westminster  Assembly  : 
Thomas  Goodwin,  Philip  Nye,  William  Bridge,  Jeremiah 
Burroughs,  and  Sidrach  Simpson ;  and,  usually,  William 
Greenhill  and  William  Carter  acted  hand  in  hand  in  favor 
of  Independency  in  that  assembly.  To  these,  Baillie 
adds  Caryl,  Phillips,  and  Sterry.  To  their  efforts,  small 
minority  as  they  were,  we  are,  under  God,  indebted  for 
much  of  the  ecclesiastical  liberty  which  we  now  enjoy. 
A  Scots  army,  fifteen  thousand  strong,  was  invoked  to 
make  the  arguments  of  their  opposers  respected.  Seve- 
ral of  their  very  valuable  papers  are  quoted  in  this  work, 
from  Hanbury,  Punchard,  and  Neal. 

Jacob,  Henry,  an  eminent  earlv  Nonconformist  di- 
vine;  educated,  at  Oxford.  D.  1621,  set.  60.  At  first 
he  wrote  against  the  Separatists,  but  at  length  embraced 
Semi-separatist  principles,  and  wrote  with  great  power  in 
their  defence  ;  was  a  companion  of  Robinson  in  Holland ; 
became  pastor  of  the  First  Congregational  Church,  Eng- 
land. D.  1621,  set.  60.  Defence  of  Church  and  Minis- 
ters of  England,  Middleburg,  1599  (i) ;  Divine  Begin- 
ning of  Christ's  Visible  Churches^l610  (J) ;  Reasons  for 
Reforming  our  Churches  in  England,  1604  (J);  Humble 
Supplication  for  Toleration,  1609  (5);  Attestation  of 
Godly  Divines,  that  Church  Government  should  be  by 
the  People's  Consent,  1613  (&,  1);  Church  Confession, 
1616,  prefaced  "  Yide  et  fide,  fide  sed  vide"  {h). 

Jewell,  John,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  educated  at 
Christ's  Church  College,  Oxford.  He  held  to  absolute 
obedience  to  the  sovereign,  and  so  adopted  the  habits, 
though  against  his  own  convictions  of  right,  and  bore 
hard  on  the  consciences  of  those  who  would  not  comply. 
D.  1571,  aet.  49.  Apology  for  the  Church  of  England 
(^  d). 

Johnson,  Francis,  a  Brownist  preacher  in  Holland ; 
35* 


414  NOTICES. 

once  associated  witli  H.  Ainswortli;  held  the  absolute 
rule  of  the  elders  {b,  d). 

Junius,  Francis,  Divinity  Reader  in  Leyden  and 
Middleburg.  Had  some  controversy  with  the  exiled  Pu- 
ritans, though  Ainsworth  says  (Hanbury,  i.  172),  that  he 
neither  approved  the  English  Church,  nor  condemned 
the  Separatists'  practice.  D.  1602,  set.  57.  Letters  to 
the  English  Church  at  Amsterdam,  1602. 

King,  Peter  (Lord  Chancellor),  a  writer  of  great 
ability  and  candor.  D.  1734,  set.  65.  Enquiry  into  the 
Discipline,  &c.  of  the  Primitive  Church,  by  an  Impartial 
Witness,  Lond.  1719  (1,  9). 

KiPPis,  Andrew,  D.D.,  F.R.S.,  educated  under  Dr. 
Doddridge,  minister  at  Boston,  Dorking,  and  Westmins- 
ter ;  editor  of  Biographia  Britannica.  An  eminent  scholar. 
D.  1795,  set.  70.  Vindication  of  Dissenting  Ministers, 
1773  (3). 

Knowles,  James  D.,  late  Professor  of  the  Theologi- 
cal Seminary  at  Newton.  Columbia  College,  1824.  D. 
1838,  £et.  40.  Life  of  Roger  Williams,  Bost.  1734; 
valuable,  and  generally  candid,  but  sometimes  given  to 
special  pleading  (1,  2,  4,  8,  9). 

Latimer,  Hugh,  Bishop  of  Worcester,  was  a  great 
reformer ;  derided  the  habits,  and  so  became  an  early 
object  of  the  vengeance  of  the  Conformists  to  all  things, 
in  Queen  Mary's  reign.     Burnt  1555,  set.  85. 

Laud,  William,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the  great 
persecuting  prelate.  Himself  proved  the  truth  of  the 
assertion,  "  They  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  by  the 
sword."     Beheaded  1645,  set.  72. 

Letchford,  Thomas,  a  lawyer  from  London.  Lived 
in  Boston,  New  England,  from  1638  to  1640.  He  was 
disgusted  with  the  requirement  of  experimental  piety  for 
church  membership.     Wrote  Plain  Dealing  (a),  in  which 


NOTICES.  415 

lie  gives  a  very  candid  and  fair  account  of  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal usages  of  New  England. 

LiLBURNE,  John,  an  enthusiastic  Nonconformist. 
Styled  the  most  sincere  and  most  imprudent  of  men. 
Was  often  in  prison ;  yet,  by  his  boldness  and  energy, 
he  accomplished  considerable  for  the  cause  of  liberty. 
D.  1657,  'eet.  49.     Answer  to  a  Gentleman,  1639  {h). 

LoBB,  Stephen.  I  am  unable  either  to  learn  much 
of  this  gentleman  from'those  biographical  works  to  which 
I  have  access,  or  to  recall  what  I  have  somewhere  read 
in  his  praise.  Happily,  there  is  little  need  of  it,  as  his 
works  praise  him,  and  commend  themselves  to  reflecting 
minds.  True  Dissenter,  1685  (1).  He  was  a  volumi- 
nous writer. 

Locke,  John,  the  well-known  philosopher.  He  re- 
fused political  preferments  for  the  quiet  of  the  study,  in 
"which  he  greatly  enlightened  and  benefited  mankind. 
D.  1704,  set.  72.  Letters  on  Toleration,  Lond.  1695 
(3,  1,  2,  8,  9). 

Low  Country  Exiles.  The  Nonconformists,  who, 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  went  over  to 
Holland,  after  banishment  had  been  decreed  against 
them,  and  the  prisons  were  thrown  open,  where  such 
multitudes  of  them  had  sufi'ered,  and  so  many  perished. 
Johnson,  Ainsworth,  and  Robinson  were  among  the 
leaders  of  these  exiles.     Confession,  Amst.  1598  (1,  h). 

Macatjlay,  Thomas  Babbington,  the  celebrated  liv- 
ing English  historian.     History  of  England,  Bost.  1849. 

Maccarty,  Thaddeus.  H.  U.  1739;  ordained  pas- 
tor of  the  First  Church  in  Worcester,  1747.     D.  1784. 

Martyr,  Peter,  a  distinguished  Florentine  commen- 
tator on  the  Bible.     D.  1562,  set.  62. 

Mather,  Cotton,  D.D.,  F.R.S.,  son  of  Dr.  Increase 
Mather;    H.    U.    1678.     Ordained   colleague   with   his 


416  NOTICES. 

father,  1684.  D.  1728,  set.  66.  He  was  one  of  the 
most  remarkable  men  of  this  or  any  other  country.  His 
reading  was  immense,  and  the  number  of  his  publica- 
tions almost  or  quite  unparalleled.  He  examined  every 
subject,  though  often  superficially,  and  came  to  conclu- 
sions and  wrote  treatises  in  a  corresponding  manner. 
No  student  of  our  country's  history  and  customs  can  do 
without  his  works ;  yet  no  one  can  safely  depend  on  him 
for  any  thing  but  naked  facts,  where  superstition  and 
imagination  had  little  chance  to  bias  his  judgment. 
Sermon  to  an  Artillery  Company,  Bost.  1687  (1,  4,  5); 
Magnalia,  Hartford,  1820  (1,  3,  4,  5,  7,  8,  9,  10);  Ser- 
mon to  the  Forces  engaged  in  a  Just  War,  &;c.,  Bost. 
1689  (1,  4,  5);  Ratio  Disciplinae,  Bost.  1726  (1,  3,.  4, 
9,  10). 

Mathek,  Increase,  D.D.,  President  of  Harvard  Uni- 
versity, son*  of  Richard.  H.  U.  1656;  ordained  pastor 
of  North  Church,  Boston,  1664.  Chosen  President, 
1681,  but  his  church  refused  to  part  with  him;  re- 
chosen,  1684,  after  the  death  of  President  Rogers.  He 
exerted  an  all-controlling  influence  both  in  church  and 
commonwealth.  D.  1723,  set.  85.  First  Principles  of 
New  England  concerning  Baptism,  Camb.  1675  (1,  3,  4, 
5,  6) ;  Discourse  concerning  the  Lawfulness  of  Common 
Prayer  Worship,  &c.,  Lond.  1689  (1);  Order  of  the 
Gospel  practised  in  the  New  England  Churches  Justified, 
Bost.  1700  (1,  3,  5);  Concerning  the  Maintenance  Due 
to  Ministers,  Bost.  1706  (1,  4,  5);  Disquisition  concern- 
ing Ecclesiastical  Councils,  Bost.  1716  (1,  5);  Sermon 
at  Ordination  of  Mr.  Appleton,  Bost.  1718  ;  Dissertation 
against  Encouraging  the  Unsanctified  to  Approach  the 
Table  of  the  Lord,  Bost.  1708  (1);  Cases  of  Conscience 
concerning  Witchcraft  (1,  6). 

Mathee,  Nathaniel,  second  son  of  Richard,  and 


NOTICES.  417 

brother  of  President  Increase  Mather;  H.  U.  1647. 
Settled  in  Barnstable,  England;  ejected  in  1662,  went 
to  Holland,  and  was  minister  at  Rotterdam ;  succeeded 
his  brother  Samuel  at  Dublin ;  afterward  removed  to 
London,  and  was  pastor  of  a  Congregational  church 
there,  where  he  died,  1697,  set.  67.  Lawfulness  of  a 
Pastor's  Administering  Seals  in  another  Church,  Bost. 
1730  (1,  6). 

Mather,  Pichakd,  the  progenitor  of  the  whole  race 
in  America.  Educated  at  Oxford.  Suspended  for  Non- 
conformity in  1633,  restored,  and  again  suspended. 
Came  to  New  England,  1635  ;  ordained  pastor  of  the 
church  in  Dorchester,  1636.  He  was  a  distinguished 
ornament  of  the  churches.  Cambridge  Platform  was 
chiefly  from  his  pen.  Church  Government  and  Church 
Covenant  Discussed  in  Answer  to  Thirty-two  Questions, 
Lond.  1643  (1,  6) ;  Apology  of  the  New  England  Elders 
for  Church  Government,  Lond.  1643  (1);  Answer  to 
Herle,  Lond.  1644  (1,  3,  5). 

Mather,  Samuel,  D.D.,  son  of  Cotton;  H.  U.  1723. 
Ordained  over  the  same  church  to  which  his  father  and 
grandfather  had  ministered,  1732,  as  colleague  with  Mr. 
Gee.  He  has  been  less  praised  than  some  of  his  ances- 
tors, and  in  many  respects  needed  less.  He  was  less 
dazzling,  but  usually  more  careful  to  be  correct,  than 
any  of  them,  save  Richard  the  patriarch.  Apology  for 
the  Liberties  of  the  New  England  Churches,  Bost.  1738 
(2,  3,  4,  5,  9). 

Matjduit,  Israel,  some  time  an  English  dissenter ; 
afterwards  a  successful  merchant  and  writer  of  political 
pamphlets.  Even  Chalmers  admits  that  he  was  a  tempe- 
rate advocate  for  civil  and  religious  liberty.  D.  1787, 
eet.  79.  Case  of  Dissenting  Ministers,  a  work  of  con- 
siderable merit,  Lond.  1772,  and  Bost.  1773  (3,  1,  2). 


418  NOTICES. 

Mayhew,  Jonathan,  D.D.  ;  H.  U.  1744.  Ordained, 
1747,  pastor  of  the  West  Church,  Boston.  A  powerful 
preacher  and  acute  reasoner.  D.  1766,  a3t.  45.  Thirti- 
eth of  January  Sermon,  1750  {d,  1). 

Milton,  John,  the  poet  and  politician ;  Latin  Secre- 
tary to  Cromwell.  Educated  at  Christ's  College,  Cam- 
bridge. D.  1674,  set.  66.  Treatise  against  Prelacy, 
in  Works  (2,  1,9);  Christian  Doctrine,  Bost.  1825 
(2,  9);  Eikonoklastes,  Amst.  1690  (1,  2,  9). 

MiNOT,  Geokge  R.  ;  H.  U.  1778.  First  clerk  of 
Massachusetts  House  of  Representatives  under  the  Con- 
stitution, and  clerk  of  the  Convention  which  adopted  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States.  D.  1802,  aet.  43. 
Continuation  of  History  of  Massachusetts,  1798 — 1803 
(1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  8,  9). 

Mitchell,  John,  formerly  a  pastor  in  Connecticut; 
afterwards  in  Northampton,  Mass.  Church  Member's 
Guide,  Northampton,  1838;  a  work  of  considerable  re- 
search and  merit,  yet  not  always  correct,  particularly  on 
the  church  membership  of  ministers.  Leans  to  Conso- 
ciationism,  but  is  honest  and  candid. 

Mitchell,  Jonathan,  a  distinguished  minister  of 
Cambridge,  Mass.;  H.  U.  1647;  ordained,  1650.  The 
Result  of  the  Synod  of  1662  was  chiefly  from  his  pen. 
D.  1668.  He  overcame  Increase  Mather  in  the  Half-way 
Covenant  Controversy. 

Moody,  Joshua,  H.  U.  1653  ;  minister  of  Portsmouth, 
N.H.,  1660.  Imprisoned  by  George  Cranfield,  for  not 
administering  the  Lord's  Supper  in  the  way  of  the 
Church  of  England.  Preached  to  First  Church,  Boston, 
from  1684  to  1693.  Harbored  and  succored  those  ac- 
cused of  witchcraft,  at  his  own  peril.  Was  chosen  Pre- 
sident of  Harvard  University,  but  declined.  D.  1697, 
set.  65, 


NOTICES.  419 

Moody,  Samuel,  the  powerful,  pious,  and  eccentric 
minister  of  York,  Me.;  H.  U.  1697.  D.  1747,  set.  70. 
Remarkable  stories  are  told  of  almost  miraculous  inter- 
positions for  his  temporal  sustenance. 

MoRXAY,  Philip,  an  illustrious  Protestant  French 
nobleman.  D.  1623,  set.  72.  Mystery  of  Iniquity, 
Lond.  1612  (1);  Treatise  on  the  Church  (i). 

More,  Stephen,  pastor  of  the  church  in  Deadman's 
Place,  London.  His  congregation  were  most  of  them  ap- 
prehended and  sent  to  prison;  but  the  House  of  Lords 
interposed,  and  Mr.  More  was  afterwards  promoted. 
Sermon  before  Parliament  (J,  d) ;  Preacher  Sent  (J) ; 
Wise  Gospel  Preacher  {b). 

Morton,  Nathaniel,  one  of  the  first  planters  of 
New  Plymouth.  A  correct  and  valuable  author.  New 
England  Memorial,  Bost.  1826  (1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  8,  9). 

Mourt,  George,  supposed  to  be  one  of  the  merchant 
adventurers  to  New  England.  Relation  of  Beginning 
and  Proceedings  of  the  English  Plantation  at  Plymouth, 
in  New  England  {a). 

Neal,  Daniel,  pastor  of  an  Independent  Church, 
London.  D.  1743,  set.  65.  History  of  New  England, 
Lond,  1747  (1,  2,  4,  5,  7,  9);  History  of  the  Puritans, 
New  York,  1844.  The  latter  work  is  an  invaluable  pro- 
duction, probably  the  best  on  the  subject  (1,  2,  4,  5,  7, 
8,  9,  10). 

Neander,  Augustus,  D.D.,  a  celebrated  German 
scholar,  recently  deceased.  Planting  and  Training  the 
Christian  Church,  Philad.  1844;  Ecclesiastical  History, 
Bost.  1847. 

Newman,  Samuel,  pastor  of  the  church  in  Seekonk 
(formerly  Rehoboth),  Mass.  He  had  been  obliged  to  flee 
seven  times  in  England,  to  avoid  persecution.  Author 
of  the  Cambridge  Concordance.     D.  1663,  set.  62. 


420  NOTICES. 

NoNCONFOEMiNG  MINISTERS,  Letter  of,  Lond.  1702 

(1). 

Nonconformity,  History  of,  Lond.  170L  A 
somewhat  valuable  anonymous  work  (3). 

NoRRis,  Edward,  teacher  of  the  church  in  Salem, 
"with  Hugh  Peters  as  pastor;  afterwards  had  the  sole 
charge  eighteen  years  ;  ordained,  1640.     D.  1659. 

Norton,  John,  educated  at  Cambridge,  England; 
pastor  of  the  church  in  Ipswich,  and  removed  to  Boston 
(with  some  difficulty)  by  advice  of  council.  Persuaded 
Boston  Church  to  send  delegates  to  the  Synod  of  1647. 
He  was  famous  as  a  divine,  but  met  with  the  usual 
changes  as  a  politician.  D.  1663,  eet.  57.  Answer  to 
ApoUonius,  Lond.  1648  (1);  Catechism. 

NowELL,  Increase,  one  of  the  first  magistrates  of 
the  Massachusetts  Colony,  and  a  ruling  elder  of  the 
church  in  Charlestown,  till  it  was  decided  that  it  was  in- 
consistent for  the  same  person  to  hold  both  offices,  when 
he  resigned  the  eldership. 

Nye,  Philip,  one  of  the  Westminster  Assembly; 
educated  at  Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  and  was  curate 
of  St.  Michael's.  Fled  from  Laud's  persecution ;  was 
principal  manager  of  the  meeting  of  ministers  at  Savoy. 
Blake  has  spoken  disparingly  of  him,  following  the 
author  of  Hudibras ;  but  Neal  gives  him  a  good  charac- 
ter. Doubtless  he  was  an  eyesore  to  high  churchmen; 
but  he  certainly  had  the  confidence  of  contemporaneous 
dissenters.  Lawfulness  of  Oath  of  Supremacy,  &c., 
Lond.  1683  (1).     D.  1672,  ^t.  76. 

Oakes,  Urian  ;  H.  U.  1649;  pastor  of  church  at 
Cambridge,  1671  ;  President  of  Harvard  University, 
1675.     D.  1681,  set.  49.     A  distinguished  scholar. 

Origen,  a  distinguished  father  in  the  church.  D.  254. 
aet.  about  70.   Some  of  his  writings  savor  of  Universalism, 


NOTICES.  421 

Osgood,  David,  D.D.  ;  H.  U.  1771  ;  ordained  at 
Medford,  1774.  D.  1822,  aet.  74.  One  of  the  most  dis- 
tinguished preachers  of  Massachusetts.  Dudlean  Lec- 
ture, Camb.  1802  (1,  3,  4,  7). 

Owen,  John,  D,D.,  educated  at  Queen's  College,  Ox- 
ford, and  left  as  a  Nonconformist.  Became  Cromwell's 
chaplain,  and  Vice-Chancellor  of  Oxford.  One  of  the 
most  learned  of  the  Independent  divines.  D.  1G83,  aet. 
69.  Works,  in  22  vols.  Lond.  1826  (2,  10),  containing, 
in  vol.  xix..  Duty  of  Pastor  and  People,  Nature  of 
Schism,  Catechism,  Vindication  of-  Independents  in 
Answer  to  Stillingfleet ;  and  vol.  xx.,  Original  of  Church- 
es, Answer  to  Stillingfleet's  Unreasonableness  of  Separa- 
tion, and  True  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church. 

Paget,  John,  a  semi-conforming  Puritan  of  consider- 
able ability.  Wrote  Arrow  against  the  Separation  of 
the  Brownists,  Amst.  1618  (5).  This  was  stoutly  op- 
posed by  H.  Ainsworth  and  J.  Davenport. 

Parjeus,  David,  D.D.,  a  famous  professor  at  Heidel- 
burg.  Author  of  various  Expositions  of  Parts  of  the 
Bible.     D.  1622,  «t.  74. 

Parker,  Robert,  a  Wiltshire  divine,  educated  at 
Cambridge,  England ;  father  of  Thomas  Parker,  first 
minister  of  Newbury,  Mass.  Fled  to  Holland,  and  be- 
came chaplain  of  the  garrison  at  Doesburg,  where  he 
died,  1630.  Increase  Mather  styles  him  the  Incompara- 
ble Parker.  Against  Symbolizing  with  Antichrist,  &c., 
Lond.  1607  (1,  6);  Ecclesiastical  Polity  (6). 

Pemberton,  Ebenezer,  pastor  of  Old  South  Church, 
Boston.  A  distinguished  divine.  D.  1717.  Sermon  at 
Ordination  of  Mr.  Sewall,  Bost.  1718  (1). 

Penry,  John,  one  of  the  martyrs  for  Congregational- 
ism, styled  the  Apostle  of  Wales,  being  the  first  that 
preached    the    Gospel    to   the    Welsh;     Oxford,    1586. 
36 


422  NOTICES. 

"Wrongfully  suspected  of  being  the  author  of  the  Mar- 
Prelate  Pamphlets.  Apprehended  as  an  enemy  to  the 
State,  and  hanged  1593. 

Peters,  Hugh,  educated  at  Trinity  College,  Cam- 
bridge, where  he  spent  nine  years.  The  early  companion 
of  Hooker  and  Davenport;  was  colleague  with  William 
Ames  in  Rotterdam;  came  to  Salem,  Mass.,  1635,  and 
succeeded  Roger  Williams  ;  assisted  Vane,  Winthrop, 
Cotton,  and  Shepard,  in  framing  the  Fundamentals  of 
Massachusetts ;  was  sent  on  important  business  to  Lon- 
don by  the  General  Court  of  Massachusetts.  Here  he 
figured  greatly  in  the  Revolution  as  a  divine,  a  politician, 
and  even  a  military  commander.  After  the  Restoration, 
he  was  hanged  and  quartered  with  savage  cruelty,  on  ac- 
cusation of  having  compassed  the  king's  death,  1660,  set. 
61.  No  man  has  been  more,  or  more  unjustly,  calum- 
niated.    See  Mr.  Felt's  Memoirs  of  his  Life. 

PiEECE,  James,  an  eminent  Presbyterian  divine  of 
Exeter;  an  Arian.  D.  1730.  Vindication  of  Dissent- 
ers, Lond.  1718  (2,  3,  9). 

PoLHiLL,  Edwaed,  Esq.,  a  learned  gentleman  of  Ber- 
"wash,  in  Sussex,  in  constant  communion  with  the  Church 
of  England,  zealously  concerned  for  truth,  and  not  for 
party.     Discourse  on  Schism,  Lond.  1694  (1,  4). 

PoLYCAKP,  Bishop  of  Smyrna,  one  of  the  eminent 
Fathers.     Burnt,  167. 

Pond,  Enoch,  D.D.  ;  B.  U.  1813.  Minister  of 
Ward  (now  Auburn),  Mass. ;  a  distinguished  professor 
of  Bangor  Theological  Seminary.  The  Church,  New 
York,  1837 ;  The  Mather  Family,  Bost.  (Mass.  S.  School 
Soc),  1844. 

Price,  Richard,  LL.D.,  pastor  at  Newington  Green 
and  Hackney.  A  great  philosopher  and  an  Arian  divine. 
D.1791,set.  67. 


NOTICES.  423 

Prince  Thomas;  H.  U.  1707.  Travelled  exten- 
sively. Ordained  pas';or  of  Old  South  Churcli,  Boston, 
1718.  D.  1758,  aet.  71.  Was  one  of  the  most  learned 
and  useful  men  of  his  age.  He  founded  the  New  Eng- 
land Library,  the  portions  of  which  that  escaped  the  Van- 
dalism of  the  British  soldiery  are  still  an  invaluable 
treasure.  Chronology,  Bost.  1736  (1,  2,  3,  4,  7,  8,  10). 
This  work  shows  almost  unbounded  research,  and  the 
most  scrupulous  accuracy  ;  yet  he  could  not  procure  sub- 
scribers for  a  second  volume,  and  only  a  small  portion  of 
it  was  ever  published.  Caliender  said  at  the  time,  that 
it  was  "  an  honour  to  the  country,  though  he  wished  for 
his  sake  that  he  had  taken  less  pains  to  serve  an  ungrate- 
ful age.  .  ,  .  Sooner  or  later,  the  country  will  see  the 
advantage  of  his  work,  and  their  obligation  to  him.'* 
Remarks  eliciting  more  of  discernment  than  of  the  spirit 
of  prophecy.     D.  1758,  set.  71. 

PuiNCiPLEs  OF  THE  Protestant  Religion  ;  a  work 
by  the  Ministers  of  Boston  to  meet  the  insinuations  of 
George  Keith,  Bost.  1690  (1,  3). 

Propositions  to  Parliament  for  Gathering  In- 
dependent Churches  ;  an  anonymous  valuable  tract, 
1647  {h). 

Prynne,  William,  a  distinguished  English  Presby- 
terian lawyer ;  educated  at  Oriel  College,  Oxford ;  re- 
moved to  Lincoln's  Inn,  1620 ;  lost  part  of  his  ears  for 
writing  Histrio-mastix,  and  the  remainder  of  them  for  sa- 
tirizing Laud,  besides  being  pilloried,  fined,  and  branded. 
He,  in  turn,  became  the  chief  manager  of  Laud's  trial, 
being  then  member  of  the  Long  Parliament.  D.  1669, 
set.  69.     Histrio-mastix,  Lond.  1633  (1,  3,  4,  9). 

PuNCHARD,  George,  formerly  pastor  of  the  church  at 
Plymouth,  N.H,,  now  editor  of  the  American  Traveller. 
History  of  Congregationalism,  Salem,  1841 ;  View  of  Con- 


424  NOTICES. 

gregationalism,  Andover,  1844; — works  which  deserve 
to  be  better  known  and  prized. 

Rainolds  (Raynolds,  Reynolds,  et  al.),  John,  King's 
Professor  at  Oxford,  and  President  of  Corpus  Christi,  a 
reforming  and  conforming  Puritan.  Opposed  Bancroft's 
claims  to  jure  divino  Episcopacy,  and  plead  the  cause  of 
the  Puritans  in  Hampton  Court  Conference  (Z>,  d).  A 
great  scholar  and  living  library.  D.  1607,  set.  68. 
Overthrow  of  Stage  Plays,  Middleburg,  1600  (1). 

Rathband,  William,  a  great  opposer  of  the  Inde- 
pendents. Published  an  account  of  the  sentiments  of 
the  New  England  Churches,  which  he  did  not  well  under- 
stand, 1644.  Thomas  Welde  stripped  him  of  every  fea- 
ther in  his  Reply  {h). 

Robinson,  John,  educated  at  Cambridge.  At  first,  a 
conforming  Puritan  and  minister  at  Norwich,  and  fled 
with  his  people  to  Holland  in  1608-9,  whence  a  portion 
of  them  came  to  Plymouth,  and  commenced  the  settle- 
ment of  New  England.  A  wise  and  far-seeing  man,  and 
a  shrewd  and  sound  divine.  His  positions  are  always 
strong,  and  hard  to  be  overthrown.  D.  1625,  set.  50. 
Several  of  his  treatises  are  referred  to  in  this  Dictionary, 
quoted  from  Hanbury  and  Punchard.  His  complete 
works  are  now  just  published  by  the  Congregational 
Union  of  England  and  Wales,  and  the  American  Doctri- 
nal Tract  Society.  They  are  invaluable  to  those  who 
would  understand  Congregationalism. 

Rogers,  John,  first  martyr  in  Queen  Mary's  reign. 
Prebend  of  St.  Paul's ;  refused  to  wear  the  habits,  and 
60  disturbed  the  disguised  Papists,  who  brought  him  to 
the  stake  in  1555.  Assisted  Coverdale  in  translating 
the  Bible  into  English. 

Rutherford,  Samuel,  one  of  the  Scots  Presbyterian 
Commissioners  to  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  Profes 


NOTICES.  425 

sor  of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  St.  Andrews.  Author 
of  several  treatises  against  Congregationalism,  answered 
by  Cotton,  Hooker,  and  others. 

Saint's  Apology;  an  anonymous  tract,  1645,  con- 
taining a  succinct  representation  of  a  visible  church  under 
the  gospel  (5). 

Sandys,  Sir  Edwin,  son  of  the  archbishop ;  was  pre- 
bend of  York.  Travelled  extensively,  and  published  the 
result  of  his  observations  entitled  Europae  Speculum, 
Lond.  1687;  from  the  author's  edition,  1599  (4).  He 
most  evidently  leaned  to  and  sustained  Congregational 
views.  Some  of  the  Robinson  Church  were  of  his  house- 
hold. Educated  at  Corpus  Christi,  Oxford.  D.  1629, 
set.  68. 

Savoy  Confession  ;  a  declaration  of  the  faith  and 
order  owned  and  practised  in  the  Congregational  churches 
in  England,  agreed  upon  by  the  synod  at  the  Savoy, 
Oct.  12,  1658  ;  essentially  the  san^e  as  the  Westminster 
Confession,  and  adopted  by  Boston  Massachusetts  Synod, 
1680.  Goodwin,  Owen,  Nye,  Bridge,  Caryl,  and  Green- 
hill  were  the  committee  who  revised  it. 

Saybrook  Platform  ;  the  Confession  of  Faith,  Heads 
of  Agreement,  and  Articles  of  Discipline,  adopted  by  the 
Assembly  of  ministers  and  messengers  of  the  churches  at 
Saybrook,  1708.  This  Platform  embodies  the  consocia- 
tion plan,  and  is  the  generally  but  not  universally  re- 
ceived directory  of  the  Connecticut  churches. 

Sacheverell,  Henry,  educated  at  Oxford.  A  zeal- 
ous, fiery  advocate  for  non-resistance,  and  contemner  of 
the  toleration  of  Dissenters,  for  which  he  was  impeached 
by  the  House  of  Commons,  and  found  guilty  in  the  reiga 
of  Queen  Anne. 

ScoTTow,  Joshua,  an  eminent  merchant  of  Boston ; 
admitted  to  the  First  Church,  Boston,  1634.     Lived  to  a 
36*   , 


426  NOTICES. 

great  age,  and  published  Old  Men's  Tears,  &c.,  Bost. 
1691  (1).  Narrative  of  the  Planting  of  Massachusetts 
Colony,  Bost.  1694  (1). 

Sewall,  Joseph,  D.D.  ;  H.  U.  1707.  Ordained  col- 
league with  Mr.  Pemberton,  pastor  of  the  Old  South 
Church,  Boston,  1713.  Distinguished  for  his  piety. 
Sermon  at  Ordination  of  Messrs.  Parker,  Hinsdell,  and 
Secomb,  as  missionaries  to  the  Indians,  Bost.  1733  (1). 

Shepa-ED,  Thomas,  educated  at  Emanuel  College, 
Cambridge.  Silenced  by  Laud.  He  came  to  New  Eng- 
land in  1635,  and  succeeded  Hooker  at  Cambridge.  Es- 
teemed one  of  the  first  divines  of  New  England.  D. 
1649,  ^t.  43.  Matter  of  the  Visible  Church  (1,  6); 
Church  Membership  of  Children,  Camb.  1663  (I,  5); 
Defence  of  Answer  to  Nine  Positions  (with  John  AUin), 
Lond.  1648  (1,  6). 

Simpson,  Sidkach,  B.D.,  one  of  the  Independents  in 
the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  of  the  Committee  for 
digesting  the  Savoy  Confession.  Fled  from  Laud's  per- 
secution, and  was  minister  of  an  Independent  Church  at 
Rotterdam ;  afterward  Master  of  Pembroke  Hall,  and 
was  one  of  the  triers  of  the  ministry  during  the  inter- 
regnum. Even  Baillie  acknowledges  him  a  discreet, 
learned,  and  zealous  man,  well  skilled  in  cases  of  con- 
science. D.  1658.  Fast  Sermon  (1,  3,  4,  6,  J) ;  Anato- 
mist Anatomized,  Lond.  1644  {b);  Lond.  1643  (1). 

Smith,  John,  pastor  of  the  original  Separatist  Church 
in  England;  organized,  1602,  from  which  Robinson's 
Church  colonized.  He  endured  great  sufferings  and  im- 
prisonment in  England,  escaped  to  Holland  in  1606,  and 
settled  at  Amsterdam.  Here  he  became  a  Baptist,  and 
immersed  himself.  Hence  he  is  sometimes  called  a  Se- 
Baptist.  He  then  immersed  Helwisse,  his  associate,  and 
other  disciples.     D.  1610. 


NOTICES.  427 

Spaeke,  Thomas,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Divinity,  Ox- 
ford. A  famous  Nonconformist  divine,  who  figured,  with 
Travels,  at  the  Conference  of  Lambeth,  and  plead  the 
cause  of  the  Puritans  in  the  Hampton  Court  Conference 

Sparks,  Jared,  LL.D.  ;  H.  U.  1815.  A  distin- 
guished scholar,  and  late  President  of  Harvard  University. 
American  Biography  (1,  2,  4,  5,  8,  9,  10). 

Stiles,  Ezra,  D.D. ;  Y.C.I  746.  One  of  the  greatest 
scholars  the  college  had  ever  produced ;  ordained,  New- 
port, R.I.,  1755;  President  of  Yale  College,  1778.  D. 
1795,  set.  68.  Convention  Sermon,  Post.  1761  (1,  2,  4, 
5,  9,  10) ;  a  most  lucid  exposition  of  the  several  interests 
which  operated  in  the  construction  of  the  Cambridge  and 
Saybrook  Platforms,  and  of  Congregational  principles 
and  practices  generally.  It  should  be  republished,  and 
in  the  possession  of  every  friend  of  religious  liberty. 
Election  Sermon,  New  Haven,  1783  (1,  4,  5,  7,  9,  10). 

Stillingfleet,  Edward,  Bishop  of  Worcester.  An 
elegant  writer.  D.  1699,  set.  64.  Irenicum,  1659  {h); 
Unreasonableness  of  Separation. 

Stoddard,  Solomon;  H.  U.  1662.  Ordained,  1672, 
pastor  of  church  at  Northampton,  Mass.,  where  he 
preached  without  interruption  fifty-six  years.  He  was 
presbyterially  inclined  in  his  views  of  church  govern- 
ment, and  in  favor  of  admitting  all  baptized  persons  to 
the  communion.  D.  1729,  set.  86.  Instituted  Churches, 
Lond.  1700  (1,  3) ;  Right  of  Visible  Saints  to  the  Lord's 
Supper,  though  destitute  of  a  Saving  Work  in  their 
Hearts,  Bost.  1709  (1).     See  Gospel  Order  Revived. 

Strype,  John,  a  learned  editor.  D.  1737,  set.  94. 
Ecclesiastical  Memorials ;  Annals  of  Reformation  (2,  3, 
8,9). 

Stxtbbes,  Philip;  Anatomic  of  Abuses,  Lon.  1583(1). 


428  NOTICES. 

Taylor,  Nathaniel,  minister  of  the  Gospel  in  Lon- 
don; author  of  several  valuable  treatises.  Vindication 
of  Dissenters,  v.  Dr.  Sherlock,  Lend.  1702  (1). 

Taylok,  Timothy,  pastor  of  a  church  in  Dukinfield, 
in  Cheshire  (with  Samuel  Eaton).  Defence  of  Sundry 
Positions,  Lond.  1645  (1,  3). 

THACHtR,  Peter;  H.  U.  1696.  Ordained  at  Wey- 
mouth ;  removed  to  Boston,  1720,  and  was  installed  pas- 
tor of  the  New  North  Church ;  colleague  with  Mr.  Webb. 
His  removal  caused  great  excitement,  on  the  ground  that' 
it  was  robbing  the  church  in  Weymouth,  and  derogating 
from  the  character  of  the  ministry.  D.  1739,  set.  61. 
Objections  to  his  Ordination,  Bost.  1720  (3,  6);  Decla- 
ration (with  John  Webb)  in  behalf  of  themselves  and  the 
New  North  Church,  Bost.  1720  (1,  5). 

ToMPSON,  William,  pastor  of  the  church  in  Brain- 
tree  called  by  Dr.  Mather  one  of  the  American  pillars. 
Ordained,  1639.  D.  1666,  set.  68.  Answer  to  Herle 
(and  K.  Mather),  Lond.  1644  (5). 

Travers,  Walter,  B.D.,  Fellow  of  Trinity  College, 
Cambridge.  Ordained  at  Antwerp,  1578;  was  one  of 
the  defenders  of  the.  Puritans  at  the  Lambeth  Conference ; 
silenced  for  life  for  Nonconformity;  went  into  Ireland, 
and  became  Provost  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin.  One  of 
the  worthiest  divines  of  the  age. 

Trumbull,  Benjamin,  D.D.,  minister  of  North 
Haven,  Conn. ;  Y.  C.  1760.  D.  1820,  set.  85.  History 
of  Connecticut,  New  Haven,  1818,  a  work  of  great  value 
(1,  7,  8,  9,  10). 

Turner,  Charles  ;  an  esteemed  minister  of  Dux- 
bury ;  H.  U.  1752.  Ordained,  1755;  dismissed,  1775. 
Afterwards  settled  at  Turner,  Me.  D.  1818,  set.  81. 
Plymouth  Anniversary  Sermon,  Bost.  1778  (1,  5). 

Udall,   John,   minister   of    Kingston-upon-Thames, 


NOTICES.  429 

Silenced  for  Nonconformity  ;  sentenced  to  die  for  writing 
the  Mar-Prelate  Pamphlets,  which  he  solemnly  denied, 
and  died  of  broken  heart  in  Marshalsea  Prison,  1592. 
The  witnesses  in  his  favor  were  denied  a  hearing  in  court, 
"because  they  were  against  the  queen's  majesty."  De- 
monstration of  Discipline  (probably  Declaration  of  Disci- 
pline), 1574  (5). 

Upham,  Charles  W.  ;  H.  U.  1821.  For  several 
years  minister  in  Salem,  more  recently  has  figured  in 
political  life.  Is  now  mayor  of  Salem.  Dedication  Ser- 
mon, Salem,  1826  (1,  3,  4);  Second  Century  Sermon, 
Salem,  1829  (1,  3,  4). 

Upham,  Thomas  C,  Professor  in  Bowdoin  College, 
Me.  Ratio  Disciplinse,  a  work  of  great  research,  and 
generally  correct,  Portland,  1844. 

Vane,  Sir  Henry,  the  younger,  Governor  of  Massa; 
chusetts,  1636.  Returned  to  England,  was  active  for 
Cromwell,  and  hanged  and  quartered  for  high  treason ; 
with  Hugh  Peters,  after  the  Restoration,  1662,  set.  50. 
Imbibed  many  errors,  but  had  clear  views  of  ecclesiastical 
liberty. 

Ware,  Henry,  Jun.,  D.D. ;  H.  U.  1812.  Pastor  of 
church  in  Boston,  and  afterward  Professor  of  Sacred 
Rhetoric  in  Harvard  University.  History  of  Old  North 
and  New  Brick  Churches,  Boston,  Bost.  1821  (1,  3). 

Watts,  Isaac,  D.D.,  the  poet,  philosopher,  and  divine. 
Assistant  to  Dr.  Isaac  Chauncy,  in  London,  1698,  and 
succeeded  him  in  1701-2.  Mr.  Price  was  chosen  his 
assistant  in  1703.  Had  feeble  health  till  his  death,  1748, 
aet.  74.  Works  in  7  vols.  (2,  3,  7,  9,  10);  Terms  of 
Christian  Communion ;  Foundation  of  a  Christian  Churcji, 
in  Works. 

Webb,  John,  first  pastor  of  New  North  Church,  Bos- 
ton; H.  U.  1708;    ordained,   1714;    survived  one  col- 


430        *  NOTICES. 

league  (Mr.  Thaclier),  and  enjoyed  the  assistance  of 
another  (Dr.  Eliot)  eight  years,  who  pronounced  him 
one  of  the  best  of  Christians  and  of  ministers.  Sermon 
at  the  Ordination  of  a  Deacon,  Bost.  1731  (1,  6).  —  See 
Thacher,  Peter. 

Welde,  Thomas,  first  pastor  of  the  church  in  Rox- 
bury ;  refused  to  submit  to  the  ceremonies,  and  came  to 
New  England,  1632;  was  sent  to  England  with  Hugh 
Peters,  1641,  and  returned  to  his  former  parish,  Dur- 
ham; from  which,  Eliot  says,  he  was  ejected,  1662; 
though  Blake  says  that  he  died  1660.  A  very  judicious 
minister.     Answer  to  Rathband,  Lond.  1644  (Z>). 

Wells,  Noah,  D.D.,  minister  of  Stamford,  Conn. ; 
Y.  C.  1741;  ordained,  1746.  D.  1776.  A  theologian 
of  great  renown ;  author  of  several  valuable  treatises 
against  the  Episcopate,  also  of  other  works. 

West,  Samuel,  a  famous  Arminian  divine ;  H.  U. 
1754  ;  ordained  at  Dartmouth  about  1764.  D.  1807,  eet. 
77.     Plymouth  Anniversary  Sermon,  Bost.  1778  (1,  5). 

White,  John.  H.  U.  1698.  Pastor  First  Church 
in  Gloucester.  D.  1760.  Lamentations  (in  Wise's  Vin- 
dication), Bost.  1772. 

Whitgift,  John,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury ;  a  ta- 
lented but  severe  governor  of  the  church,  pressing  confor- 
mity with  rigor.  In  early  life  he  was  against  the  habits, 
and  run  the  usual  race  of  the  relapsed  from  reforms. 
D.  1603,  set.  73.     Controversy  with  Cartwright  (5,  d). 

WiCKLiEFE,  John,  D.D.,  educated  at  Merton  College ; 
called  the  Evangelical  Doctor;  Professor  of  Divinity, 
Oxford,  and  had  the  highest  reputation  in  the  university; 
a  great  opposer  of  the  mendicants.  He  sustained  Ed- 
ward III.  in  his  refusal  to  pay  tribute  to  the  Pope,  and 
openly  appealed  to  the  v/ord  of  God  as  the  rule  of  faith 
and  practice,  and  met  the  thunders  of  the  Vatican  for  hia 


NOTICES.  431 

presumption ;  yet  he  died  in  his  bed,  1384,  aet.  about  60. 
He  maintained  the  great,  leading  principles  of  Congrega- 
tionalism with  great  success  in  that  dark  age,  and  was 
the  grand  means  of  planting  principles  of  religious  free- 
dom in  England. 

Williams,  Roger,  educated  at  Oxford,  was  a  minis- 
ter of  the  Church  of  England ;  became  a  Separatist,  and 
came  to  New  England,  1631 ;  became  pastor  of  the  church 
in  Salem  ;  sentence  of  banishment  was  denounced  against 
him,  and  he  fled  to  Providence,  where  he  afterwards  be- 
came a  Baptist,  and  subsequently  a  Seeker;  renouncing 
his  immersion  because  it  had  not  been  performed  by  one 
who  had  himself  been  immersed  in  regular  succession. 
He  was  certainly  in  advance  of  his  brethren  on  this  side 
the  water  on  some  points  of  religious  liberty,  though  the 
commonplace  representations  of  his  case  are  as  much  at 
variance  with  his  own  version  of  the  matter  as  with  that 
of  his  opponents.  D.  1683,  set.  84.  (See  art.  Tolera- 
tion, in  Dictionary.)  Bloody  Tenet  (2,  3,  5,  6).  Answer 
to  Cotton's  Letter,  Lond.  1648  (1).  Hireling  Ministry 
none  of  Christ's,  Lond.  1652  (1). 

WiLLARD,  Samuel,  Vice-President  of  Harvard  Uni- 
versity;  minister  of  Groton,  and  Old,  South  Church, 
Boston;  H.  U.  1659;  a  devoted  Christian  and  sound 
divine.  D.  1707,  set.  68.  Election  Sermon,  Bost.  1694  (1); 
Discourse  concerning  Laying  the  Hand  on  the  Bible  in 
Swearing,  Lond.  1689  (1,  6). 

WiNSLOw,  Edward,  Governor  of  Plymouth  Colony ; 
united  with  Robinson's  Church  in  Leyden.  He  was  a 
very  laborious  and  serviceable  magistrate,  and  a  daring 
adventurer.  D.  1655,  a^t.  61.  Good  News  from  New 
England  (a). 

WiNTHROP,  John,  many  years  Governor  of  Massachu- 
setts Colony ;   expended  a  fine  estate  and  endured  great 


432  NOTICES. 

privations  for  tlie  benefit  of  the  colony;  was  for  mild 
and  tolerant  measures  in  religion.  D.  1649,  set.  60, 
Journal,  Bost.  1825,  in  the  town-libraries  of  Massachu- 
setts (9,  10). 

Wise,  John,  minister  of  Ipswich;  H.  U.  1673  ;  was 
zealously  attached  to  civil  and  religious  liberty ;  was  im- 
prisoned by  Andros  for  remonstrating  against  the  taxes. 
D.  1725,  set.  73.  A  learned  scholar  and  an  eloquent 
orator.  Quarrel  of  the  Churches  Espoused,  and  Vindi- 
cation of  the  Liberties  of  the  New  England  Churches. 
Bost.  1772  (1,  2,  4,  7). 

WisNER,  B.  B.,  D.D.;  Union  College,  1813  ;  ordained 
pastor  of  Old  South  Church,  Boston,  1821  ;   afterward 
Secretary  of  the  American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  , 
Foreign  Missions.     D.   1835,  set.  40.     History  of  Old 
South  Church,  Boston,  Bost.  1830  (1,  3,  5,  6,  7,  8,  9). 

Withers,  John.  I  can  learn  nothing  of  this  author, 
save  his  book,  which  ought  to  render  his  name  immortal. 
History  of  Resistance  in  the  Church  of  England,  Lond. 
1710  (1). 

Wren,  Matthew,  Chaplain  to  Charles  I.  and  Bishop 
of  Hereford  and  Norwich.  D.  1667,  set.  81.  Articles  of 
Visitation  {d). 

Young,  Alexander,  D.D.,  pastor  of  New  South 
Church,  Boston;  H.  U.  1820;  ordained,  1825.  Chroni- 
cles of  the  Pilgrims  (1,  2,  4,  5,  8,  9)  ;  a  work  of  merit 
and  research.  Chronicles  of  Massachusetts  (1);  Dudlean 
Lecture,  Bost.  1846  (1,  2),  in  which  he  breaks  up  the  fal- 
low ground  of  Episcopacy. 


THE    END. 


i 
DATE  DUE 

f 

GAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  U.S.A. 

Prmcflon    Thcoloq.cil    Seni. 


^**H!l||Itlillllllllllli!lill!IIM)llillilt 


Tftt 


iilil 


1    1012  01029  9743       1911 


I 


!!i   It 


Hi!!  I!!  ^1 
1!!'  III!  i! 


'ffMi       !  !! 

'  J 

i 

1                                                                                  ■'!:         i           !         ■      1             1!                1             ll                                     1               !                \u;..:L      !i.,ft       1 

i 

■  i  1 . 1 

ui.iiiiiiiHiiiii 

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 

iii'iii.i  .I'liii 

iiiiiiiih'iiiiii 

IliHIHIIMIUilMIIMI! 

liliiilliiiiiiiiiililiiii 

iiijiiiiiiiiljijiiliil 

nut 
iiilii 

jlilii 

niMi 
iiiiii 

iiilii 

IIIIII   i    ,  Is.  1.1 

iliijiilll  iiiifi   ■  i'l 

r^ 

..i.iiii 

mil 

liijl 

liilllllilillllil 

iiiijiiiiiiiilijiiliiiiii 

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 

iiiiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiih' 

Tr 

:i:j!^::;::;i 

r'l' 

rur.-j  ::  ;,, 

',■■.'..'•.•"•■  ■ 

IlKll 

tint* 

iiiiiiHIHHD'illiilMiliii 

